incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Symphony contribution logistics
Date Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:23:30 GMT

On Apr 24, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:26 AM, drew <drew@baseanswers.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 11:10 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:50 AM, drew jensen
>>> <drewjensen.inbox@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 10:32 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>> Wearing my IBM hat for a minute...
>>>>> 
>>>>> We're putting the final touches on our Symphony contribution.   The
>>>>> contribution will look something like this:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1) A source tree
>>>>> 
>>>>> 2) An SGA that covers IBM intellectual property in that source tree
>>>>> 
>>>>> 3) A set of binary install images, for the convenience of project
>>>>> members wishing to review this contribution
>>>>> 
>>>>> 4) Some written material that describes in detail the enhancements
>>>>> made in Symphony compared to OpenOffice.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The source tree is comparable in size to OpenOffice, so it will not be
>>>>> possible for us to just check it in without interfering with Apache
>>>>> SVN mirroring.  So I'm proposing that we (IBM) will make a local SVN
>>>>> repository, check the code into there, and then generate a dumpfile
>>>>> from SVN that we can share with Infra, and which they can schedule for
>>>>> import.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I propose that we put this tree here:
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/symphony/trunk
>>>>> 
>>>>> Once we've made the contribution, and once the community has had the
>>>>> opportunity to review what is there, we can then have a discussion on
>>>>> how we can make best use of this contribution to advance the project.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Does this sound right?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Any concerns?
>>>> 
>>>> Yeah, a few - but I'll wait for the release to happen first.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> We intend to make the contribution immediately after the 3.4 release.
>>> We're doing the work now.  That's why I'm bring this up now.
>>> 
>>> If you withhold your concerns until after the 3.4 release then we may
>>> be unable to address your feedback until after the contribution is
>>> made.
>> 
>> *smile*... well, in that case I have no concerns - I guess it will all
>> be quite good, can't wait to see it :)
>> 
> 
> Note: the thread is about contribution *logistics*, e.g., getting the
> bits from here to there is the least disruptive way. If you have any
> concerns with my proposal for that, please speak up now.  Anyone. But
> I do have some experience with this.  Rememeber, I'm the one who did
> this for the initial check-in of the OOo source tree.
> 
> If you have concerns with the contents of Symphony, the features, what
> we do with the code, etc., then that's a discussion for after we get
> the files over.  Unless of course your concerns are so great you want
> to prevent the code from being checked in at all.
> 
> I fully expect we'll have a lively discussion about "What should we do
> with the Symphony contribution?"  But that discussion will only have
> an informed technical basis once we've contributed the code.
> 
> Make sense?

Yes, I like that this will come in as a separate part of the svn repos.

Post AOO 3.4 release it is very reasonable to expect a lively discussion about the AOO Roadmap.
It is hoped that will reach a consensus. 

I believe there will be good reasons to balance a cleanup AOO 3.4.1/3.5 release with starting
immediately on AOO 4.0 via integration of Symphony features.

By cleanup I mean a combination of more languages, critical bug fixes, read me / installation
improvements, and NOTICE, LICENSE, and DISCLAIMER organization. NOTICE, LICENSE and DISCLAIMER
issues might impact the release. I'm thinking things through look for an email in several
hours on the [VOTE][DISCUSS] thread.

Regards,
Dave


> 
> -Rob
> 
>> //drew
>> 
>>> 
>>> -Rob
>>> 
>>>> //drew
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message