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 23:56:59 GMT




Peter Donald <peter@apache.org> writes:
> The best I have seen so far is a committer forking a project so he
> can add his name as an @author - would have been funny except that
> it effectively blocked progress in that project.


On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 01:04, B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Are you saying that this actually happened?

Peter Donald <peter@apache.org> writes:
> of course. I had to revert vetoed changes from the same
> committer. Kool - huh!

B. W. Fitzpatrick wrote:
> Extremely disturbing.

Stephen McConnell <mcconnell@apache.org> writes:
> Wow - "extremely disturbing" - that cause for concern. Let's go out
> and nail the poor unfortunate to a cross.  Verify the facts?  Forget
> it - lets get on with a good old fashioned crusifiction.

In the context of this email, I don't give a squat about the facts of
this situation.  If what Peter said is *true*, then yes, it's
disturbing.  Big whoop de-doo-da.  Why on earth are you getting so
defensive?

The situation that Peter mentioned is not what's of concern
here--we're talking about commit policies and, as the subject of the
mail would imply, code ownership.

If you want to show the world that Peter's wrong (and I have no idea
who is wrong or right here), then please, start your own thread and
post some facts (pointers to CVS log messages, etc).  I'd like to talk
about code ownership here.

-Fitz

Mime
View raw message