Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 63652 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2002 14:20:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 63628 invoked from network); 15 May 2002 14:20:44 -0000 Subject: RE: [docs] opensource and quality control To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Gerhard Froehlich" Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 16:14:39 +0200 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D08ML005/08/M/IBM(Release 5.0.9a |January 7, 2002) at 15/05/2002 16:20:43 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, >> From: Torsten Curdt [mailto:tcurdt@dff.st] >> >> On Wednesday 15 May 2002 12:00, Gerhard Froehlich wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > >I think that we already have this. It is the duty of the >> > >committer to undertake initial quality control when they >> > >accept the patch from Bugzilla and prepare for their >> > >commit. If they do not know anything about the topic, then >> > >they should not be taking on the patch - let someone else >> > >do it. >> > >> > Who is someone else? Patches in bugzilla are very lonely in >> > the moment. There are simply not applied. Why? Because there >> > about 600 classes in Cocoon, about 10 active committers and >> > nobody feels responsible. It's easy to say, oh I didn't >> > wrote this code, therefor I can't apply this patch. But >> > patches like NPE fixes, can be applied by every committer, I >> > swear! >> >> Well, I guess every committer feels responsible for what he is >> committing.Although this is good this is also the problem. >>Who can say he is fully aware >> if the patch does not break anything else... If it's your code - wel= l, >> then you do know better what he is doing and if it still breaks something - >> well, you are the one in charge... That's different when you apply a= patch >> from someone else... >> >> I guess bugfixes are not the problem but larger rewrites and >>additions... >> >> Simple "improvements" can easily break other stuff (as e.g. on of th= e >> last esql improvements that took me a couple of hours to fix. No accusation >> but a fact. And you we are all short in time...) >> >> Maybe we try too hard to keep HEAD stable? >> >> ...but I like a quite stable HEAD so it's easier to type "cvs update= " >> without the fear of breaking your current system ;-) >> >> So what to do, what to do... ? > >Make and follow a plan: > >X:00 - X:19 Read morning emails >X:20 - X:59 Review a patch >... > >:) That's it, so simple ... ;-) Greets Gerhard ------------------------------------------------------------------ Gerhard Fr=F6hlich IBM Account Austria - 00/627 BIS e-business integration services IBM Austria / Vienna A-1020 Vienna, Obere Donaustrasse 95 Tel: ++43 1 21145 4818 Fax: ++43 1 21145 4191 e-mail: gerhard_froehlich@at.ibm.com= --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org