that's a different topic since we should also align it with jsf2.2 (as much
as possible).
however, in general: agreed - we have to re-visit everything (a reality
check is very important) -> if we start too many topics in parallel, the
visibility of each topic will be low(er).

regards,
gerhard



2012/6/28 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>

> I know what you mean, but you worded it a bit too drastically :)
>
> If a proposed feature is somehow related to CDI and sounds valuable, then
> we will for sure add it.
> But only after collecting additional ideas and doing a 'reality check' on
> the topic ;)
>
> And if it helps I like to make this clear again: we will not even import
> stuff like the CODI window handling 1:1 without a review. Actually I know
> quite a few parts which I like to do radically different/easier.
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>
> > To: [email protected]
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >
> > for sure at least a vote can drop such parts - we did it already.
> > i just mentioned the possibility because everybody has to be aware of it.
> > (with an external sandbox it would be even worse.)
> >
> > @ rest:
> > agreed
> >
> > regards,
> > gerhard
> >
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/28 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> >
> >>  I would not word it that drastically that we 'delete code if there is
> > no
> >>  discussion upfront'.
> >>
> >>
> >>  The discussion upfront is mainly important to raise visibility and
> >>  attention. And to be able to get a response from many people about
> those
> >>  new ideas. That way we can make good ideas even better and prevent
> easily
> >>  overseen shortcomings. No one of us is perfect, but together we kick
> butt!
> >>
> >>  Btw, the initial discussion is only a 'basic agreement' to kick off
> >>  attention imo. If we see during implementation that other ways are
> >>  superior, then there is no problem to amend the initially discussed
> topics.
> >>
> >>  LieGrue,
> >>  strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  > From: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]>
> >>  > To: [email protected]
> >>  > Cc:
> >>  > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 9:50 AM
> >>  > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >
> >>  > i agree with mark.
> >>  >
> >>  > since we are talking about whole modules:
> >>  > the idea of apache-labs [1] is a bit different but maybe it works for
> > us
> >>  as
> >>  > well.
> >>  > (potential community members can clone it and follow our git
> >>  > discussion-workflow.)
> >>  >
> >>  > in any case: there needs to be a discussion before moving such parts
> > to
> >>  the
> >>  > main repository -> that also means: if there is no agreement, we
> > have to
> >>  > drop it again.
> >>  >
> >>  > regards,
> >>  > gerhard
> >>  >
> >>  > [1] http://labs.apache.org
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  > 2012/6/28 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> >>  >
> >>  >>  With 'public' I meant that the main communication tool is
> > the
> >>  > mailing
> >>  >>  list. There is a saying "if it's not on the list, it
> > didn't
> >>  > happen".
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  IRC is fine as backing channel, but there are different time
> > zones etc.
> >>  >>  It's also not logged (because freenode has a policy about not
> > logging
> >>  >>  chats), thus other uses cannot simply search some archive to find
> > any
> >>  old
> >>  >>  information.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  It's perfect if you drop a few lines of mail explaining what
> >>  >>  problem/idea/feature you are working on and add a pointer to some
> >>  github
> >>  >>  repo.
> >>  >>  But be aware that you must work alone on that gibhut repo or at
> > least
> >>  must
> >>  >>  _not_ accept patches/pull-requests from non-committers. Otherwise
> > you
> >>  would
> >>  >>  not be IP clean. And since goog vs orcl (Harmony,...) we _really_
> > care
> >>  >>  about that!
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  github is also a great tool, but it doesn't really strengthen
> > the team
> >>  >>  collaboration spirit. It's more fore the lone fighter who
> > works on his
> >>  >>  own...
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Maybe I should explain it another way what could happen:
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  Imagine you get a cool new feature which has a decent complexity.
> > Say
> >>  45
> >>  >>  classes and 25000 lines of code. And all that in one big
> > merge-commit!
> >>  >>  Compare that with work that evolves over a few weeks with 5
> > people
> >>  working
> >>  >>  on it and adding ideas. There would be much more understanding of
> > the
> >>  topic
> >>  >>  in the community and the quality would also be much better at the
> > end.
> >>  >>  There will also be much less overlapping with other features in
> > the
> >>  project
> >>  >>  quite naturally...
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  strub
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  > From: Jason Porter <[email protected]>
> >>  >>  > To: "[email protected]" <
> >>  >>  [email protected]>
> >>  >>  > Cc: "[email protected]" <
> >>  >>  [email protected]>; [email protected]
> >>  >>  > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 8:32 PM
> >>  >>  > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > Why wouldn't this be in the public? The idea is to get
> > people to
> >>  >>  contribute.
> >>  >>  > If we need a separate Apache repo for a sandbox, okay fine
> > but then
> >>  > we're
> >>  >>  > back to the icla issue aren't we?
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > Sent from my iPhone
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  > On Jun 27, 2012, at 14:10, Mark Struberg
> > <[email protected]>
> >>  > wrote:
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>  Btw, another thingy.
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  It is not the best community building approach to
> > develop
> >>  > something 'in
> >>  >>  > the dark' and then drop all that on all other community
> > members.
> >>  >>  >>  Don't get me wrong, it's perfectly fine to
> > experiment
> >>  > around if
> >>  >>  > ideas are good at all. But doing this 'in public' is
> > much more
> >>  >>  > appreciated. You can get lots or precious feedback that way.
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  >>  strub
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>
> >>  >>  >>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  >>>  From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]>
> >>  >>  >>>  To: "[email protected]"
> >>  >>  > <[email protected]>
> >>  >>  >>>  Cc:
> >>  >>  >>>  Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:33 PM
> >>  >>  >>>  Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>  basically +1
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>  BUT we really have to be careful that we don't
> > do too
> >>  > much at
> >>  >>  > github!
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>  All commits done on github must either be done by a
> >>  > deltaspike
> >>  >>  > committer or
> >>  >>  >>>  someone who has at least an iCLA on file.
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>  Commits from other people need to get added via an
> > attachment
> >>  > in a
> >>  >>  Jira
> >>  >>  > ticket.
> >>  >>  >>>  I know this sounds not really git-like, but
> > it's the only
> >>  > way we
> >>  >>  > can ensure
> >>  >>  >>>  IP clearance.
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>  LieGrue,
> >>  >>  >>>  strub
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>  ----- Original Message -----
> >>  >>  >>>>  From: Mehdi Heidarzadeh
> > <[email protected]>
> >>  >>  >>>>  To: [email protected]
> >>  >>  >>>>  Cc:
> >>  >>  >>>>  Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 7:28 PM
> >>  >>  >>>>  Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>  +1
> >>  >>  >>>>  Great idea.
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>  On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 4:52 AM, Shane Bryzak
> >>  >>  > <[email protected]>
> >>  >>  >>>  wrote:
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>    Fantastic idea, +1.
> >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>    On 27/06/12 05:39, Jason Porter wrote:
> >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    Hey everyone!
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    I wanted to bring up the idea of
> > having a
> >>  > sandbox to add
> >>  >>  > bits and
> >>  >>  >>>  other
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    non-core extensions. We have a great
> > bunch of
> >>  > people from
> >>  >>  > the Seam
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    development group looking to add
> > their
> >>  > extensions, but
> >>  >>  > they're
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >>>>  either not
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    on the roadmap for DS, or are very
> > far down. I
> >>  > suggest we
> >>  >>  > setup a
> >>  >>  >>>>  sandbox
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    on github people can write to, or at
> > least do
> >>  > pull
> >>  >>  > requests to so
> >>  >>  >>>  we
> >>  >>  >>>>  can
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    get some of these modules and other
> > ideas in
> >>  > and pull
> >>  >>  > them into
> >>  >>  >>>  core as
> >>  >>  >>>>  we
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    get there. We can also use this as a
> > vetting
> >>  > ground for
> >>  >>  > new ideas
> >>  >>  >>>  and
> >>  >>  >>>>  other
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    things which may not exactly fit into
> > core,
> >>  > like the
> >>  >>  > forge
> >>  >>  >>>  extension.
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    To do this we need to
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    1. Setup the repo somewhere
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    2. Seed it with a basic structure
> > (pom.xml,
> >>  > contribution
> >>  >>  >>>  instructions,
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    etc)
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    3. Get some CI setup somewhere (we
> > could
> >>  > leverage
> >>  >>  > OpenShift for
> >>  >>  >>>  this if
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    needed)
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    What does everyone else think?
> > I've
> >>  > cc'd the Seam
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>  >>>  Development
> >>  >>  >>>>  list here
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    hoping to get some feedback from them
> > as well
> >>  > and
> >>  >>  > hopefully
> >>  >>  >>>  rekindle
> >>  >>  >>>>  some
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    of the fire we had there.
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    --
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    Jason Porter
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.**com
> >>  >>  >>>>  <http://lightguard-jp.blogspot.com>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    http://twitter.com/**lightguardjp
> >>  >>  >>>>  <http://twitter.com/lightguardjp>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    Software Engineer
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    Open Source Advocate
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    Author of Seam Catch - Next
> > Generation Java
> >>  > Exception
> >>  >>  > Handling
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    PGP key id: 926CCFF5
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    PGP key available at: keyserver.net
> >>  >>  > <http://keyserver.net>,
> >>  >>  >>>>  pgp.mit.edu <
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    http://pgp.mit.edu>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  > ______________________________**_________________
> >>  >>  >>>>>>    seam-dev mailing list
> >>  >>  >>>>>>  [email protected]
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  > https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/seam-dev<
> >>  >>  https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/seam-dev>
> >>  >>  >>>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>>  --
> >>  >>  >>>>  Mehdi Heidarzadeh Ardalani
> >>  >>  >>>>  Independent JEE Consultant, Architect and
> > Developer.
> >>  >>  >>>>  http://www.TheBigJavaBlog.com
> >>  >>  >>>>
> >>  >>  >>>
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >>
> >>  >
> >>
> >
>

Reply via email to