myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Simon Lessard" <simon.lessar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: JSF2.0 implementation
Date Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:50:05 GMT
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org>wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Simon Lessard
> <simon.lessard.3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Simon,
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 2:56 AM, Simon Kitching <skitching@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I see from the commit list that a new JSF2.0 branch has been created.
> >>
> >> I don't remember seeing *any* kind of discussion or even announcement
> >> about this. While I am happy to see JSF2.0 work going on, this kind of
> >> approach does not seem to be at all in the "community" spirit. IMO,
> major
> >> events like this should be discussed beforehand.
> >
> > As mentioned by other people, there was a vote about this a while back .
> Why
> > did I create it just now? Simply because my company agreed to provide
> some
> > resource to help with the implementation and we were ready to get
> started.
>
> One might ask here for a CCLA ;-)
> We did that for Oracle way back, and update once in a while all the
> contributors,
> that have signed the iCLA.


Yeah, but Fujistu signed a CCLA already when I became commiter, so that's a
non issue as well.


>
>
> >
> >>
> >> One issue, for example, is that the core-1.2 stuff is currently
> >> half-way-converted from the trinidad plugins to the
> myfaces-builder-plugin.
> >> So now it is branched, any changes need to be applied in two places.
> >
> > To be honest, I find this irrelevant, it's a branch, not a trunk and I'll
> > most likely do some branch merging when core 1.2.x get release and the
> > plugin might have to change a little to support jsfVersion 2.0.
> >
> >>
> >> In addition, a large amount of code has just been committed by someone
> >> (slessard) who is not a particularly regular contributor to myfaces.
> >
> > I see even less relevance in that statement.
> >
> >>
> >> Where did this code come from? Do we need a code grant for it? Note that
> >> when code is developed iteratively on the dev list then there is no need
> for
> >> a grant. But a sudden code dump is different, even when contributed by
> >> someone who has signed a CLA.
> >
> > The code was coded just yesterday by me and is not much at all, creating
> > missing classes for the JavaDoc change log is in no matter a large amount
> in
> > term of complexity. Also since I was the only author of it (my teammates
> > will wait until I have added the signatures). There's absolutely no need
> of
> > code grant either.
>
> I agree on the code grant, b/c of it is really pretty trivial to
> create those API classes/interfaces
> (based on the javadoc log, as I said before).
> @signatures: you mean the iCLA / CCLA, aren't you ?


nah, I meant method signatures, it will be easier for my teammates to know
what they have to do once there's a nice // TODO: Convert to JSF 2.0 added
in every new method's body.

As far as I understand the legal issues (might have to fallback to
legal@apache.org though), they won't need a CLA until they become commiters.
I don't know if I should have the company add their names to the CCLA
however. Technically, we aren't bound contractualy by any intellectual
property transfer with my employer and we're developping outside normal
business hours so we aren't directly paid either for it so I don't know if
adding their name to the CCLA is even needed or not.


~ Simon


>
>
> >
> >>
> >> And with 3 branches to now maintain, we need to discuss whether and when
> >> we phase out maintenance of the jsf-1.1 branch. Currently when users
> provide
> >> patches in jira, they almost always provide a patch against only one
> version
> >> and the committer ports it, which does increase the load on existing
> >> committers. When do we stop asking committers to do this when patching
> bugs?
> >
> > I can take care of the branch merging, this is how we handled the
> trinidad
> > 1.2 branch at first, Adam would do the merging every now and then, so I'm
> > not asking the committers to do some extra work.
>
> yup. not a big deal. Also I doubt that that many folks will work
> there, on the branch.
> If the branch needs some merging... fine as well, IMO.
>
> >
> >>
> >> To repeat, I'm *happy* that jsf2.0 implementation is in progress, and
> >> appreciate people contributing time to write an ASF-2.0-licensed
> >> implementation. But it is a  standard saying at Apache that "community
> is
> >> more important than code", and the "community" aspect here seems to have
> >> been rather neglected...
> >
> > I don't agree at all here. Although it wasn't announced on the dev list,
> the
> > JIRA ticket created to attach patches was speciafically for the
> community.
>
> and the branch creation was also discussed.
>
> > Code provided by Fujitsu employees will never go through me with direct
> > commit, it will all be added as patches, even extra tests and
> documentation
> > as we want them and everyone else willing to help get the credit for it.
>
> we do the same. Folks provide patches and jira tickets to describe the
> problem.
>
> > Furthermore, I personally didn't announce it because the branch will be
> very
> > instable for a week or two until we finish adding the missing signatures
> > (impl might not even always compile).
>
> dev@ is a developers community; so that would be fine :-)
>
> -Matthias
>
> > If community wasn't important in the process we would just have used a
> > private repository at Fujitsu, worked on it for some time with my team,
> then
> > commit some very large amount of code (real large) that would have needed
> a
> > code grant, prevented the people to see at what rythm things were
> > progressing and contributing. The only point I *could* give you here is
> that
> > maybe I should have annouced the creation directly on the dev list and
> point
> > on the JIRA ticket and SVN url rather than relying only on JIRA ticket
> > report that get forwarded on the dev list.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > ~ Simon
> >
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Simon
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> Need JSF and Web 2.0?
> http://code.google.com/p/facesgoodies
>
> further stuff:
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
>

Mime
View raw message