geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From anita kulshreshtha <a_kuls...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: M2 : car-maven-plugin and geronimo-plugin.xml files
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2006 05:33:07 GMT

--- Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com> wrote:

 The patch was
> not
> > used, instead the plugin code was modified to add this
> > functionality.
> 
> I only added a few changes you had in the original patch since they  
> were the only ones that could be added cleanly.  
  ?
As you mentioned,  
> then functionality is still not there, so I really have issues with  
> the last sentence above.
>

This code is from servlets-examples-jetty config (rev 429124):
       <resources>
            <resource>
                <directory>${pom.basedir}/src/conf</directory>
                <targetPath>META-INF</targetPath>
                <includes>
                    <include>geronimo-plugin.xml</include>
                </includes>
                <filtering>true</filtering>
            </resource>
        </resources>
  
   This code has been added to many applications config. Which means
that you are trying to write it yourself and have no intention of using
the patch. Why did you ask me to make the patch? 

> But I can tell you right now that I will most lilly not take the  
> patch asis for the very same reasons why I had changed the plugin  
> before.

Vow.. I don't blame you for exercising the power of a committer. you
get to commit code that does nothing and reject the code that works!
You have the power to shut down other peoples work.

Jason, I was also aware of the issues with the code and had been
wanting to fix them and add more functionality. You are constantly
changing the code that I wrote without any communication. You have made
it _impossible_ for me to work on this code. I am not saying that you
are doing it intentionally. IMO, you should have accepted the code
because it provided the required functionality and allowed me to make
improvements. I agree with Hiram Chirino on this subject. I am quoting
from a conversation on the list :
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--RTC--ActiveMQ-GBean-modules-p4867711.html

"Perhaps I should start a new thread on this thought, but I just wanted
to comment that we need to be careful about how critical and the level
of perfection that we expect from the contributed patches.  I would
say that if a patch does not regress the project and it moves it
forward in the right direction, the patch should be accepted even if
it's not perfect.

It kind of reminds me of something David B told me once, if the code
is perfect and stable, you won't be able to build a community around
the project it since it just works.  This makes sense to me.  If the
code is 80% of the way there, then you give an opportunity for folks
to join your community by submitting additional patches that help it
get to the 100% mark."
   
Thanks
Anita

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Mime
View raw message