On 2007.08.02, Tom Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Something has to change here. Either AOL needs to come clean, level
> with the community, or we need to simply inform hapless developers
> what they should expect.
As of November 2006, I no longer work for AOL. Yet, I still remain
involved with AOLserver. My contributions to AOLserver as of November
2006 have been my own, not AOL's. Sure, I still communicate with folks
at AOL, naturally, as they're one of the larger dependents of it, but I
also work with other folks who use AOLserver and am taking their needs
into consideration as well. However, as they no longer employ me, I
personally choose what to work on, when and how to contribute to the
project. Any contributions on my part that appear to be nefariously
complicit with "AOL's agenda for AOLserver" are merely coincidence, I
assure you.
You call for change--I'm all for it. Should I step down as project
leader and let someone else take over? The irony is that the title
really doesn't mean much at all.
So, in the spirit of open source software meritocracies: please place
your money where your mouth is. Come up with a list of actionable
changes you'd make if you were king. Lets hear it--and if everyone
agrees to a particular change, we'll declare it made. (Note: declaring
anything to a volunteer-driven organization doesn't guarantee that
anyone will actually do it.)
> The community really should enforce public discussion of anything
> included in AOLserver, and more important enforce standards of
> compatability, upgrade pathways, etc. _OR_ we should notify everyone
> who comes near that it isn't really public development.
The "community" can't enforce anything since this is all
volunteer-driven, for the most part.
As far as I can tell, the folks actually contributing changes are
communicating to each other, and the results of such contributions get
checked into public CVS. That's as "public development" as many open
source projects get. (The "large" open source projects with hundreds of
active contributors are *NOT* the norm. Please remember that.)
Actual contributions to AOLserver have either been to the wiki, which
has a RSS feed of changes for everyone to monitor, or to the CVS
repository, which is publically accessible for anyone to check out and
review the changes. There's the AOLSERVER-SF mailing list which
receives commit emails, so people can get opt-in to get push-style
notification when changes are committed. There's the IRC chat on
irc.freenode.net #aolserver, where some folks hang out and talk.
When new code gets committed, how come there isn't a flurry of questions
after people have read and reviewed the source? Does nobody care? Do
people not know how to read C?
Tom, you're a "project admin" of the AOLserver project at SourceForge
and have been for years, now. You've had CVS commit access for as long
as I can remember. The only commit I can find from you
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) *ever* is this one:
RCS file: /cvsroot/aolserver/aolserver/nsd/tclresp.c,v
Working file: nsd/tclresp.c
head: 1.21
branch:
locks: strict
access list:
keyword substitution: kv
total revisions: 24; selected revisions: 1
description:
----------------------------
revision 1.21
date: 2007/01/22 03:23:15; author: rmadilo; state: Exp; lines: +3 -2
Bug where Tcl_SetBooleanObj accesses shared object, fixed with copy of obj
This appears to be a change first made in the NaviServer project (see:
nsd/tclresp.c 1.12). Reviewing the diff of your change, we see:
$ cvs diff -u -r1.20 -r1.21 nsd/tclresp.c
Index: nsd/tclresp.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/aolserver/aolserver/nsd/tclresp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.20
retrieving revision 1.21
diff -u -r1.20 -r1.21
--- nsd/tclresp.c 7 Oct 2005 00:48:23 -0000 1.20
+++ nsd/tclresp.c 22 Jan 2007 03:23:15 -0000 1.21
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@
* Tcl commands for returning data to the user agent.
*/
-static const char *RCSID = "@(#) $Header:
/cvsroot/aolserver/aolserver/nsd/tclresp.c,v 1.20 2005/10/07 00:48:23 dossy Exp
$, compiled: " __DATE__ " " __TIME__;
+static const char *RCSID = "@(#) $Header:
/cvsroot/aolserver/aolserver/nsd/tclresp.c,v 1.21 2007/01/22 03:23:15 rmadilo
Exp $, compiled: " __DATE__ " " __TIME__;
#include "nsd.h"
@@ -837,6 +837,7 @@
static int
Result(Tcl_Interp *interp, int result)
{
- Tcl_SetBooleanObj(Tcl_GetObjResult(interp), result == NS_OK ? 1 : 0);
+ /* Tcl_SetBooleanObj(Tcl_GetObjResult(interp), result == NS_OK ? 1 : 0); */
+ Tcl_SetObjResult(interp, Tcl_NewBooleanObj((result == NS_OK ? 1 : 0)));
return TCL_OK;
}
Considering interps aren't shared between threads, exactly what "shared
object" is your commit log referring to, here? I mostly ignored asking
this question when the commit first happened, but I'm now curious: where
did this contribution originate?
I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time accepting demands from people as to
how I should be volunteering my own personal time to an open source
project who don't actually contribute material changes themselves. At
this point, I'm feeling like you're just being a griefer.
-- Dossy
--
Dossy Shiobara | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://dossy.org/
Panoptic Computer Network | http://panoptic.com/
"He realized the fastest way to change is to laugh at your own
folly -- then you can let go and quickly move on." (p. 70)
--
AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/
To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
with the
body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject:
field of your email blank.
