river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Screw "the future".
Date Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:53:46 GMT
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 10:41 AM, Dan Creswell <dan@dcrdev.demon.co.uk> wrote:


> If Niclas is representative of the majority I'd be prepared to step down
> and let you all have at it.  Note that I don't agree philosophically (on
> the remote vs local stuff) with what you're doing but as the minority
> will happily step back, take a copy of the source code as it is now and
> fork (because I believe the philosophical difference is too big to do
> otherwise).

i've been reading this list for some time now and i would like to take
this opportunity to step in now (before positions get too entrenched
and anyone does anything hasty)

i've observed many symptoms that arise from the problem of a mature,
high quality codebase. it's hard to develop a bigger and deeper
community with this kind of code base. reviewing patches contributed
is time consuming, and too many correct solutions require too much
investment. in the long run, though, new live and ideas are almost
always needed but it's hard to know which ones will really benefit the
codebase until they have been explored reasonably fully in code.

i doubt that a binary fork is the answer. apache does not use a
benevolent maintainer model but a collegiate one. there is no need for
any minority to step aside in favour of any other.

i suggest allowing a variety of internal forks. providing that those
developers who want to push river forward in different directions
agree to work in outside trunk, it should be possible both to work on
perfecting the current codebase and on experimenting in new
directions. if this sounds anything like an acceptable solution to the
current committers, then i can offer some suggest about ways and means
to do this which have worked ok in the past here at apache.

- robert

View raw message