But if we don't talk about that stuff at all, then there will be no visibility and no progress neither.
There is really no problem with spreading out parallel topics, IF there are people interested in contributing. What I do _not_ like to have is starting with 15 different topics and not finishing anything! Btw, what is the state of deltaspike-security? I have no clue about it nor did I do any review. I've also not seen any commit lately. Who is working on that? Or is noone working on it at all? LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 11:24 AM > Subject: Re: Sandbox for DeltaSpike > >t hat'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 >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >
