cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PATCH][Gump] your definitions break Gump builds
Date Fri, 17 Jun 2005 12:30:36 GMT
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>>Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>it's not a matter of being annoyed enough (we are already!), it's
>>>>the fact that cocoon needs that file at build time.
>>>
>>>
>>>Hmm, so why don't you realize that you have a typo in it for many
>>>days?  Like when you rename a jar but forget to update the
>>>descriptor?
>>
>>because cocoon doesn't use *all* of that data, only parts.
> 
> 
> Unfortunately Gump gets into trouble because of the parts Cocoon
> doesn't use.

I know.

> If you don't use any of the projects you define for jars in your repo,
> maybe you better shouldn't define those projects at all?  Instead nag
> the Gump crew to turn them into installed packages.

I personally wouldn't be against such a thing.

>>>>Now, I would be totally in favor of granting the gump committers
>>>>commit access to the cocoon project.
>>>
>>>Should be quite trivial to add a rule to asf-authorization that
>>>grants rw to @gump for just that file, at least I think it allows
>>>file-granularity.
>>
>>Even better. Can we do it or is it something that infra@ has to do?
> 
> 
> Sylvain can, or I could, but I'd certainly prefer if the Coccon PMC
> made the change.

ok, I'll start a vote.

-- 
Stefano.


Mime
View raw message