harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: classlib/trunk repository structure
Date Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:38:24 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> Alexey Petrenko wrote:
>>> Sure -- if you want to change the website doc to better reflect reality
>>> that would be welcomed.
>> OK.
> Hang on - the Authorized Contributor Questionnaire is conceptual in how
> we want to manage any exposure issues.  The fact that it doesn't
> absolutely reflect the layout in SVN is irrelevant.

I think one of us is missing the point...

I'm looking at the text in the "Division of Repository" subsection in
the page

it has a schematic representation of the repository that is not precise.
 I'm *not* suggesting that we change the contribution policy / ACQ.

> I'd prefer making any changes to that document until our overall layout
> settles down to avoid having to do continual changes.
>>> We are actually in the enviable position of receiving some great
>>> contributions into the project, which means (1) we are kinda busy
>>> integrating this stuff which is more productive than rearranging the
>>> stuff we currently have, and (2) it makes it easier for contributors to
>>> hit a stationary target than one that changes from week to week.
>> Yes. It is so.
>> But I believe that we will help contributors if we will strictly
>> define repostitory layout. Even without the changes to current one.
> What problem are you really trying to solve?  IOW, has this stopped
> anyone from contributing?
> If so, please let us know, because there is no need to match the
> structure when a contribution is made.  Good code is good code, and as
> the receiver of the "gift", we're happy to do the work to put into our
> project layout, with gratitude.

+2 (send good code)

>> The following questions are unclear (after reading policy and loking
>> into repository):
>> 1. Where to put native sources? Inside the module or inside the
>> native-src.
> We haven't resolved with 100% certainty, but I think we're in agreement
> that in module is preferred.  But so far, there has been no compelling
> reason to stop what we're doing and move it.
>> 2. Where to put system dependent java sources?
>> 3. Where to put system independent native sources?
> We'll figure it out.  Right now we have a few good exmaples, and we
> should take a hard look and decide.
>> Or these questions are does not matter now and commiters can put their
>> sources anywhere they want?
> No - we all work together.  Committers aren't individual contractors -
> we're collaborating to build something we all agree with...
> Contributors, on the other hand, are free to provide to us in any way
> they want.  We'd be happier if it was more like our structure(s) than
> different, but we beggars can't be choosers... :)

Agree with all above too.



Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

View raw message