tomcat-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jim Jagielski <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Send trunk to the sandbox
Date Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:28:12 GMT

On Aug 21, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Yoav Shapira wrote:

> Hey,
> On 8/21/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <> wrote:
>> Beyond withdrawing the silly vote, asking for the code you veto to be
>> removed, and moving forward, don't you think you should hold a  
>> vote to
>> make trunk R-T-C first?
> The latter is definitely a vote.  (And I'd be -1 on it).
>> input from other project members, of course.  But I become  
>> concerned when
>> only two people in a project even grok the technical implications  
>> of what
>> is in their repository.
> I think that's stretching it a bit far.  I, for one, grok the
> technical differences between Remy and Filip's approaches to Comet,
> but I just don't care about them.  Either approach looks fine enough
> to me, and so as long as other work progresses I believe the Comet
> stuff will eventually be sorted out.  Maybe now is that time.
> But please don't equate one pissing match with the entire rest of the
> committers not understanding what's going on.  I'm guessing at least
> one or two other people share my stance above.

IMO, code talks, bullshit walks. And I've been on both sides
of the argument many times in many places.

As Bill noted, there are lots of ways of skinning a cat. If
person 1 comes up with a way, and implements it, then sure
person 2 has the right to say that the implementation sucks
and their way is better, but if it never gets beyond the
talk phase, well... I can't see scrapping work 1 when work 2
isn't even in a debate mode.

Vetoes are serious shit. They pack a lot of punch. They
are not things to throw out willy nilly with no real
technical justification other than some hand waving. Nor
are they items to ignore simply because you don't like
the person raising the veto.

Re: naming of trunk/branches/sandbox/whatever. Trunk is designed
to be the "best guess" of the *community's* idea on what the
codebase will be looking like. It works best when it is free
and easy with a c-t-r policy. Consider it, for lack of
a better term, the community sandbox. Then, bits and pieces
of it (patches and SVN revisions) get folded back into those
areas that represent what will be released (usually branches).
This is usually done via a r-t-c policy since you are now
touching code that is directly in the release path.

And personally, I think it's a damn shame that we don't
see "I owe you a beer" more on the TC lists... Pissing
matches are ok if, afterwards, you all meet, get together,
have a few drinks and *get* pissed.

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

View raw message