Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Rui Silva" <flex@rduartes.net>
To: <flex-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: whiteboard
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 15:55:30 -0800
Reply-To: flex@rduartes.net
Message-ID: <313af25a$6b85f8a9$2b36ed5$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Peter,

I totally understand what you're trying to say and I have doubts myself 
about the confusion that might arise not so much regarding ownership, which 
is less important in such a project, but more regarding whether that 
particular branch is open for contribution or if the author would prefer to 
do his developments in isolation.

In order to keep things simple, I'd say to keep the username folder 
strategy for now and see how things progress.

Yet another approach that is kind of middle ground would be to not separate 
by username, but to include the author's username in the branch name 
alongside with the feature of the branch (I think it was Omar who suggested 
this). The main advantage of this approach would be that it brings the 
feature name to the root of the whiteboard (I don't have to go into each 
user's folder to see what is being worked on).

Best,
Rui

-------- Original Message --------
> From: "Peter Elst" <peter.elst@gmail.com>
> Sent: segunda-feira, 9 de Janeiro de 2012 22:46
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: whiteboard
> 
> >  I don't think I have to say that I would never go into something and
> > delete stuff without talking to the contributor.
> >
> 
> my mistake, sorry Mike - so in general lets say somebody wants to work 
on
> something in the whiteboard, would you create your own copy of it or put 
it
> in the original folder?
> 
> I'm just asking because with the username in the folder, the situation
> could arise that the code was originally put in the whiteboard by own
> committer but 99% of the code got contributed by somebody else.
> 
> Guessing that is not an issue but might create some confusion.
> 
> - Peter