incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremy Boynes <>
Subject Re: EJB code dump, was: svn commit: r511225 [1/4]
Date Sun, 25 Feb 2007 18:51:14 GMT
Thanks Raymond.

Strictly the code should not be in SVN until it has been cleared  
legally and part of that would be to deal with issues like the  
copyright here: 

First step of the legal side is to have receipt acknowledged by an  
authorized member of the ASF which could be any of our mentors or the  
IPMC Chair. This ack would be reflected in the ip-clearance page.  
Then we can vote to accept the contribution (lazy consensus by the  
IPMC being enough but they do need to be notified).

There are more details on the process here:

I have questions about what we are going to do with this but I'll  
leave those for your other thread.

On Feb 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, Raymond Feng wrote:

> Hi,
> Sorry for the confusion as I'm new to this situation. I meant to  
> get the code into SVN as a base for discussion. I chose the  
> paticular branch simply because I only need minor effort to get the  
> code built.
> I moved the code to my sandbox for now ( 
> asf/incubator/tuscany/sandbox/rfeng/ejb) and removed it from the  
> branch.
> I'll start another thread to discuss if and/or how we can accept  
> the contribution.
> Thanks,
> Raymond
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "ant elder" <>
> To: <>
> Cc: <>
> Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2007 5:39 AM
> Subject: Re: EJB code dump, was: svn commit: r511225 [1/4]
>> On 2/25/07, Jeremy Boynes <> wrote:
>>> On Feb 23, 2007, at 10:26 PM, wrote:
>>> > Author: rfeng
>>> > Date: Fri Feb 23 22:26:55 2007
>>> > New Revision: 511225
>>> >
>>> > URL:
>>> > Log:
>>> > [sca-integration-branch] Add EJB reference binding (TUSCANY-1126)
>>> -1
>>> There has been no discussion at all about this contribution in the
>>> community. We've had someone from a vendor attach code in JIRA, a  
>>> co-
>>> worker say they would review and "possibly check it into a sandbox"
>>> and then this commit to a branch only the vendor's employees are
>>> working on. Not one single mail to the dev list. This isn't  
>>> community
>>> development, it's a code dump.
>>> Please take this out of SVN and talk to the community about it - you
>>> might find people are interested in it.
>> Could one of our mentors/IPMCers comment on if this -1 comes with  
>> enough of
>> a technical reason to make it a veto? If thats the case you need  
>> to revert
>> the commit now before anymore discussion Raymond.
>> Hopefully there will be discussion and development of the ejb  
>> binding on the
>> ML in future, but the way its been done I don't think warrants it  
>> being
>> removed right now. As I understand it there has been a CCLA  
>> received by
>> Apache for the code. In the past there's been a lot of similar sized
>> function committed to Tuscany trunk with no discussion until  
>> afterwards, and
>> this code didn't get put in the trunk. More discussion would be  
>> better but I
>> think one reason people do it this way may be as its easier to  
>> talk about
>> things once there is actual code in SVN to refer to and try out.  
>> The commit
>> was done late on Friday probably they're off for the weekend now,  
>> so how
>> about waiting to see if they start discussions about this  
>> contribution on
>> Monday.
>>   ...ant
>> PS, Rashmi, this looks really good to me and nicely written, i  
>> think it
>> would be a great addition to Tuscany. Hope you don't get put off  
>> by this
>> procedural debate and and can stick around to help develop Tuscany  
>> further.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message