On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 04:17, Peter Donald wrote: > On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 11:24, Sam Ruby wrote: > > Finally, I do believe that even with separate project descriptors, the > > current gump approach can scale - if more people contribute patches to > > projects that they care about and become committers themselves. As this is > > now happening, I was wondering if it was time to revisit > > > > http://jakarta.apache.org/gump/faq.html#11 > > Well I would be happy to help maintain the existing projects and definetly > interested in seeing something like this spread so that the developers using > it. > > I think the current gump approach can scale for a while longer. However note > I just chose not to gumpify another project because I knew I would be > maintaining it and couldn't be bothered ;)
I honestly think this is a problem. The vast majority of projects being built by Gump have not contributed anything to help make the Gump runs easier. I see patches emanating from Jakarta projects but haven't many and I don't recall seeing any patches from projects outside of Jakarta. > However I see another reason for allowing the GUMP descriptors to be stored > in CVS modules. Basically it makes it much easier for users to participate in > the GUMP action. +1 I think a simple mechanism of pushing these into a location for Gump would be best. When the project is sure the descriptor is correct then it can be shuttled off to Gump. > All they have to do is alter their descriptor and viola - > next run they check their results to see if it all works as they expect. This > empowers gumps "clients" a lot more and I think would encourage people to > contribte a little more - but more importantly it would encourage them to > learn about gump more which will lead to more widespread use of it. +1 > If people don't want to maintain their own descriptors then no problem wioth > that either - gump can continue to maintain them. But for the others I think > it woul dbe great. +1 This is what is going to happen with the Turbine projects, and I hope the Turbine projects can be an example of how to cooperate with Gump in a fashion that alleviates many of the current errors in the flow and makes overall maintenance a project-centric issue. > But if you want to propose this as a top level project I will definetly > support it and definelty help you maintain the project descriptors at least. > > -- > Cheers, > > Pete > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > If your life passes before your eyes when you die, > does that include the part where your life passes before > your eyes? > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
