Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Now, the usual way of contributing would be submitting a patch into
> bugzilla and someone of the committers would look at the patch and
> (perhaps) apply it, right?
> So, if instead of entering this into bugzilla, the patch is send
> directly to a committer looking at the patch and then (perhaps) applying
> it, where is the difference?
I would say that there are at least three differences:
1. it's more "politically correct" to the community: in practice there
is little or no difference, but at a very least there is a delta of time
where it's possible to discuss the patch;
2. <lawyer-hat-on>if a user uploads a patch to Bugzilla, from a legal
standpoint it's more clear that it's been *him* willing to donate the
code to the ASF. As of now it's just you acting both as a proxy and as a
witness for him</lawyer-hat-on>;
3. the contributing user gets more recognition and, since recognition is
our only way to pay him back, I think it's better for both us and them
to go through Bugzilla.
No one of the above is a compelling reason: there are cases when it just
makes sense to commit right away. I'd just think of it as a "best practice".
This is no different from what I did with Guido. I think it's pretty
clear to everyone here that I and Guido have many reason to work offlist
being both working for Orixo companies, but after the initial joint
WebDAV contribution, when he sent me a first patch I asked him to go
through Bugzilla so that the community was at least aware of what he was
doing.
This, however, doesn't change the fact that me too:
> I'm really happy that people are contributing to
> Cocoon, especially to the Cocoon portal.
All contributions are most welcome. :-)
Ciao,
--
Gianugo Rabellino
Pro-netics s.r.l. - http://www.pro-netics.com
Orixo, the XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
(Now blogging at: http://blogs.cocoondev.org/gianugo/)
|