geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Donation of Admin Console- request for help
Date Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:36:47 GMT

On Jul 11, 2005, at 12:52 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> Yep - I would suggest then we keep it simple and have
>>
>> /geronimmo/sandbox
>>
>
>     Fine with me
>
>
>> /geronimo/sandbox/misc/SoC
>>
>
>     I think we agreed this one is going to operate through patches.

Wasn't sure what we agreed on.  If patches, great.  If working as  
"regular" committer, great.

>
>
>> /geronimo/sandbox/donations/trifork
>> /geronimo/sandbox/donations/ibm
>>
>
>     I would prefer a mixed name or feature name rather than a company
> name -- so perhaps trifork-corba or corba, and web-console or
> ibm-web-console, or something like that.

Fine by me.  I figured that TriFork *and* IBM might be contributing  
more than one thing, so was a neat bucketing.  But i don't care.

>
>
>> I'd be happy w/ separate ACLs to let people work as fast and
>> "normally" as possible, w/o having to wait for patches to be
>> accepted.  There's no danger with SVN.  That said, I'd go w/ patches
>> if that was the consensus.
>>
>
>     Well, I don't want to offend anyone, but I can envision a scenario
> where we don't see eye to eye with a submitter on architecture or  
> features
> or whatever.

Heresy!  Has it EVER been the case where we don't all harmoniously  
agree?  I'm shocked!  SHOCKED!

:D

LOL


>   If the submitter charges ahead with their own changes in
> their own style and that turns out to be unacceptable to us, then the
> whole module is wasted.

The rules of technical consensus apply as for all our code - any one  
of us can veto for technical reasons.  This isn't "Geroni-forge" :)


>   If they submit patches instead, we are free to
> accept them or hold off and massage the code into something more
> appropriate to us.  I am not saying this is the expected case,  
> which is
> why I only have a minor preference for patches, but it would be  
> nice to
> account for.

Right - all I'm saying is that anyone can veto a change and roll it  
back out of SVN, so the end result is identical - community oversight  
and control of the technical nature and changes to our codebase.

geir

>
> Aaron
>
>

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org



Mime
View raw message