incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "B. W. Fitzpatrick" <f...@red-bean.com>
Subject Re: Code ownership (was Re: whoweare.html)
Date Wed, 06 Nov 2002 03:35:06 GMT
Peter Donald <peter@apache.org> writes:
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2002 14:05, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> > > I find code ownership a problem that can and must be prevented and
> > > resolved in the community. A trick that seasoned committers do on new
> > > committers is to change their first commits and work on them, to show
> > > that the code is of everyone. If they complain, it's time for a nice and
> > > bold explanation.
> > >  From my experience on this, it's not something one forgets easily ;-)
> >
> > Are you serious? Quite frankly, I find that behavior reprehensible--It
> > reeks of strange fraternity initiation rites.
> >
> > If I write, test, and commit a piece of good solid code 
> 
> If you do that then it would be unlikely to be changed. I think I know what 
> Nicola is talking about and I think it is great :) You may also notice that 
> the project who have the bigger healthier communities (at least in 
> jakarta/xml land) tend to do this all the time.
> 
> For example, someone submits some code that doesn't follow various convention
> s 
> that have been established in the project. Do you tell the contributor - 
> sorry can't take that till you fix it? No. Usually what happens is that you 
> commit the code. Then you go through and fix up style/semantic/logical 
> violations. As the commit messages go past the end user sees the corrections.
  
> Next time they are more likely to work the way the project operates.

This is very different than what I understood from Ken's post.  I
agree that consistent style is very important--I thought he was
referring to code content.  The above scenario is totally
understandable.
 
> If there are massive fixes required the user will generally see the patch 
> rejected with recomendations for a fix but usually it is better to commit and
>  
> teach by example IMHO.
> 
> > and someone
> > else goes pissing in it just to leave their scent and to show me that
> > I don't 'own' the code, I am *not* going to be amused by it.
> 
> Not many people are - they soon learn or leave. Usually a good test of 
> maturity ;) If someone has a fit because their curly bracket got moved then 
> do you really think they get collaborative development?

Right. As I said above, this makes sense.

In Subversion, we take a slightly different approach on this.  When
people send in a patch that doesn't follow style guidelines or include
a log message, we point out the issues ask them to resubmit an amended
patch.  After a developer has submitted a number of 'correct' patches,
we will then usually offer commit access.  

So it looks like we agree after all. :)

-Fitz

Mime
View raw message