incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: SVN move
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:37:52 GMT

On Jul 28, 2008, at 10:28 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

>
> On Jul 28, 2008, at 8:14 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Where I think that there is a problem is when they ditch their old
>>> infrastructure and exclusively use ASF's infrastructure to build,  
>>> maintain,
>>> and release non-ASF releases.  To be sure in the case of JSecurity  
>>> the final
>>> artifacts will not use the ASF mirrors but that does not  hide the  
>>> fact that
>>> they intend to build and maintain non-ASF releases exclusively  
>>> using our
>>> infrastructure.
>>>
>>> Craig says that's fine.
>>>
>>> I think that they should release and maintain their new and  
>>> earlier non-ASF
>>> releases on the infrastructure that they currently have or else  
>>> use ours and
>>> follow the ASF/Incubator guidelines.
>>
>>
>> If it turns out that it is *not* OK to do this (use ASF  
>> infrastructure
>> exclusively to maintain our few remaining non-ASF releases), I'm  
>> perfectly
>> ok with that and of course would respect the Incubator's wishes -  
>> but I
>> myself would ask our current JSecurity team to delay the code  
>> import into
>> the ASF.
>>
>> I don't think I would be willing to perform code modifications and  
>> patches
>> for the next Release Candidate release(s) and maybe the few point  
>> releases
>> that might follow on two different repositories.  That's a  
>> nightmare to
>> maintain - "Did I apply this patch to project-from-server-A and
>> project-from-server-B?  Hrm.. I can't remember if I JavaDoc'd that  
>> method
>> correctly in both locations...".  No thanks :)
>>
>> Sure, this might delay our incubation process another few weeks or  
>> even a
>> month or two, but I don't mind that at all - I feel comfortable that
>> JSecurity will succeed at the ASF, so I don't feel a little extra  
>> delay
>> would hurt things for us much...  This is much less painful IMO than
>> manually mantaining code in two separate locations.
>
> Let's turn this around and look at it from a different light.   
> What's stopping us from doing a 0.9.0 release in the incubator?  I'm  
> guessing that you need the packages to be the same?

I don't quite follow what you are proposing. Can you elaborate the  
details, please?

Thanks,

Craig
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>

Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message