deltaspike-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Porter <lightguard...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
Date Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:20:36 GMT
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> wrote:

> But if we don't talk about that stuff at all, then there will be no
> visibility and no progress neither.
>
> There is really no problem with spreading out parallel topics, IF there
> are people interested in contributing.
>
>
> What I do _not_ like to have is starting with 15 different topics and not
> finishing anything!
>
> Btw, what is the state of deltaspike-security?
>
> I have no clue about it nor did I do any review. I've also not seen any
> commit lately.
>
> Who is working on that? Or is noone working on it at all?


https://github.com/sbryzak/DeltaSpike/tree/security

I believe Shane has been working on it apparently, but there hasn't been
much discussion.


>  LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:24 AM
> > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >
> >t hat's a different topic since we should also align it with jsf2.2 (as
> much
> > as possible).
> > however, in general: agreed - we have to re-visit everything (a reality
> > check is very important) -> if we start too many topics in parallel, the
> > visibility of each topic will be low(er).
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/28 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >
> >>  I know what you mean, but you worded it a bit too drastically :)
> >>
> >>  If a proposed feature is somehow related to CDI and sounds valuable,
> then
> >>  we will for sure add it.
> >>  But only after collecting additional ideas and doing a 'reality
> > check' on
> >>  the topic ;)
> >>
> >>  And if it helps I like to make this clear again: we will not even
> import
> >>  stuff like the CODI window handling 1:1 without a review. Actually I
> know
> >>  quite a few parts which I like to do radically different/easier.
> >>
> >>
> >>  LieGrue,
> >>  strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  > From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> >>  > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>  > Cc:
> >>  > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:42 AM
> >>  > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >
> >>  > for sure at least a vote can drop such parts - we did it already.
> >>  > i just mentioned the possibility because everybody has to be aware of
> > it.
> >>  > (with an external sandbox it would be even worse.)
> >>  >
> >>  > @ rest:
> >>  > agreed
> >>  >
> >>  > regards,
> >>  > gerhard
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  > 2012/6/28 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  >
> >>  >>  I would not word it that drastically that we 'delete code if
> > there is
> >>  > no
> >>  >>  discussion upfront'.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  The discussion upfront is mainly important to raise visibility
> > and
> >>  >>  attention. And to be able to get a response from many people
> > about
> >>  those
> >>  >>  new ideas. That way we can make good ideas even better and
> > prevent
> >>  easily
> >>  >>  overseen shortcomings. No one of us is perfect, but together we
> > kick
> >>  butt!
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Btw, the initial discussion is only a 'basic agreement'
> > to kick off
> >>  >>  attention imo. If we see during implementation that other ways
> > are
> >>  >>  superior, then there is no problem to amend the initially
> > discussed
> >>  topics.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  strub
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  > From: Gerhard Petracek <gerhard.petracek@gmail.com>
> >>  >>  > To: deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>  >>  > Cc:
> >>  >>  > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:50 AM
> >>  >>  > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > i agree with mark.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > since we are talking about whole modules:
> >>  >>  > the idea of apache-labs [1] is a bit different but maybe it
> > works for
> >>  > us
> >>  >>  as
> >>  >>  > well.
> >>  >>  > (potential community members can clone it and follow our git
> >>  >>  > discussion-workflow.)
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > in any case: there needs to be a discussion before moving
> > such parts
> >>  > to
> >>  >>  the
> >>  >>  > main repository -> that also means: if there is no
> > agreement, we
> >>  > have to
> >>  >>  > drop it again.
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > regards,
> >>  >>  > gerhard
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > [1] http://labs.apache.org
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > 2012/6/28 Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  With 'public' I meant that the main
> > communication tool is
> >>  > the
> >>  >>  > mailing
> >>  >>  >>  list. There is a saying "if it's not on the
> > list, it
> >>  > didn't
> >>  >>  > happen".
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  IRC is fine as backing channel, but there are different
> > time
> >>  > zones etc.
> >>  >>  >>  It's also not logged (because freenode has a policy
> > about not
> >>  > logging
> >>  >>  >>  chats), thus other uses cannot simply search some
> > archive to find
> >>  > any
> >>  >>  old
> >>  >>  >>  information.
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  It's perfect if you drop a few lines of mail
> > explaining what
> >>  >>  >>  problem/idea/feature you are working on and add a
> > pointer to some
> >>  >>  github
> >>  >>  >>  repo.
> >>  >>  >>  But be aware that you must work alone on that gibhut
> > repo or at
> >>  > least
> >>  >>  must
> >>  >>  >>  _not_ accept patches/pull-requests from non-committers.
> > Otherwise
> >>  > you
> >>  >>  would
> >>  >>  >>  not be IP clean. And since goog vs orcl (Harmony,...)
> > we _really_
> >>  > care
> >>  >>  >>  about that!
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  github is also a great tool, but it doesn't really
> > strengthen
> >>  > the team
> >>  >>  >>  collaboration spirit. It's more fore the lone
> > fighter who
> >>  > works on his
> >>  >>  >>  own...
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  Maybe I should explain it another way what could
> > happen:
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  Imagine you get a cool new feature which has a decent
> > complexity.
> >>  > Say
> >>  >>  45
> >>  >>  >>  classes and 25000 lines of code. And all that in one
> > big
> >>  > merge-commit!
> >>  >>  >>  Compare that with work that evolves over a few weeks
> > with 5
> >>  > people
> >>  >>  working
> >>  >>  >>  on it and adding ideas. There would be much more
> > understanding of
> >>  > the
> >>  >>  topic
> >>  >>  >>  in the community and the quality would also be much
> > better at the
> >>  > end.
> >>  >>  >>  There will also be much less overlapping with other
> > features in
> >>  > the
> >>  >>  project
> >>  >>  >>  quite naturally...
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  >>  strub
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  >>  > From: Jason Porter <lightguard.jp@gmail.com>
> >>  >>  >>  > To:
> > "deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org" <
> >>  >>  >>  deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> >>  >>  >>  > Cc:
> > "deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org" <
> >>  >>  >>  deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org>;
> > seam-dev@lists.jboss.org
> >>  >>  >>  > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:32 PM
> >>  >>  >>  > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  > Why wouldn't this be in the public? The idea
> > is to get
> >>  > people to
> >>  >>  >>  contribute.
> >>  >>  >>  > If we need a separate Apache repo for a sandbox,
> > okay fine
> >>  > but then
> >>  >>  > we're
> >>  >>  >>  > back to the icla issue aren't we?
> >>  >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  > Sent from my iPhone
> >>  >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  > On Jun 27, 2012, at 14:10, Mark Struberg
> >>  > <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  >>  > wrote:
> >>  >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  >>  Btw, another thingy.
> >>  >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  >>  It is not the best community building
> > approach to
> >>  > develop
> >>  >>  > something 'in
> >>  >>  >>  > the dark' and then drop all that on all other
> > community
> >>  > members.
> >>  >>  >>  >>  Don't get me wrong, it's perfectly
> > fine to
> >>  > experiment
> >>  >>  > around if
> >>  >>  >>  > ideas are good at all. But doing this 'in
> > public' is
> >>  > much more
> >>  >>  >>  > appreciated. You can get lots or precious feedback
> > that way.
> >>  >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  >>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  >>  >>  strub
> >>  >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  From: Mark Struberg
> > <struberg@yahoo.de>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  To:
> > "deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org"
> >>  >>  >>  > <deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  Cc:
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:33 PM
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  basically +1
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  BUT we really have to be careful that we
> > don't
> >>  > do too
> >>  >>  > much at
> >>  >>  >>  > github!
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  All commits done on github must either be
> > done by a
> >>  >>  > deltaspike
> >>  >>  >>  > committer or
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  someone who has at least an iCLA on file.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  Commits from other people need to get
> > added via an
> >>  > attachment
> >>  >>  > in a
> >>  >>  >>  Jira
> >>  >>  >>  > ticket.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  I know this sounds not really git-like,
> > but
> >>  > it's the only
> >>  >>  > way we
> >>  >>  >>  > can ensure
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  IP clearance.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  strub
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  From: Mehdi Heidarzadeh
> >>  > <heidarzadeh2@gmail.com>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  To:
> > deltaspike-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  Cc:
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:28
> > PM
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  +1
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  Great idea.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:52 AM,
> > Shane Bryzak
> >>  >>  >>  > <sbryzak@redhat.com>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  wrote:
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>    Fantastic idea, +1.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>    On 27/06/12 05:39, Jason Porter
> > wrote:
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    Hey everyone!
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    I wanted to bring up the
> > idea of
> >>  > having a
> >>  >>  > sandbox to add
> >>  >>  >>  > bits and
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  other
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    non-core extensions. We
> > have a great
> >>  > bunch of
> >>  >>  > people from
> >>  >>  >>  > the Seam
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    development group looking
> > to add
> >>  > their
> >>  >>  > extensions, but
> >>  >>  >>  > they're
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  either not
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    on the roadmap for DS, or
> > are very
> >>  > far down. I
> >>  >>  > suggest we
> >>  >>  >>  > setup a
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  sandbox
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    on github people can write
> > to, or at
> >>  > least do
> >>  >>  > pull
> >>  >>  >>  > requests to so
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  we
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  can
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    get some of these modules
> > and other
> >>  > ideas in
> >>  >>  > and pull
> >>  >>  >>  > them into
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  core as
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  we
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    get there. We can also use
> > this as a
> >>  > vetting
> >>  >>  > ground for
> >>  >>  >>  > new ideas
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  and
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  other
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    things which may not
> > exactly fit into
> >>  > core,
> >>  >>  > like the
> >>  >>  >>  > forge
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  extension.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    To do this we need to
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    1. Setup the repo somewhere
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    2. Seed it with a basic
> > structure
> >>  > (pom.xml,
> >>  >>  > contribution
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  instructions,
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    etc)
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    3. Get some CI setup
> > somewhere (we
> >>  > could
> >>  >>  > leverage
> >>  >>  >>  > OpenShift for
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  this if
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    needed)
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    What does everyone else
> > think?
> >>  > I've
> >>  >>  > cc'd the Seam
> >>  >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  Development
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  list here
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    hoping to get some feedback
> > from them
> >>  > as well
> >>  >>  > and
> >>  >>  >>  > hopefully
> >>  >>  >>  >>>  rekindle
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  some
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    of the fire we had there.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    --
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    Jason Porter
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> > http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.**com
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> > <http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> > http://twitter.com/**lightguardjp
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> > <http://twitter.com/lightguardjp>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    Software Engineer
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    Open Source Advocate
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    Author of Seam Catch - Next
> >>  > Generation Java
> >>  >>  > Exception
> >>  >>  >>  > Handling
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    PGP key available at:
> > keyserver.net
> >>  >>  >>  > <http://keyserver.net>,
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  pgp.mit.edu <
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    http://pgp.mit.edu>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  > ______________________________**_________________
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>    seam-dev mailing list
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>  seam-dev@lists.jboss.org
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >
> > https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/seam-dev<
> >>  >>  >>  https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  --
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  Mehdi Heidarzadeh Ardalani
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  Independent JEE Consultant, Architect
> > and
> >>  > Developer.
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>  http://www.TheBigJavaBlog.com
> >>  >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>
> >>  >
> >>
> >
>



-- 
Jason Porter
http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/lightguardjp

Software Engineer
Open Source Advocate
Author of Seam Catch - Next Generation Java Exception Handling

PGP key id: 926CCFF5
PGP key available at: keyserver.net, pgp.mit.edu

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message