On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Raymond Feng <[email protected]> wrote:
> IIRC, the "unreleased" folder was created for the in-progress code that is
> not ready for the release. We agreed on the following:
> 1) Developers have freedom to add code into unreleased
> 2) Developers have freedom to move code from unreleased into trunk if they
> think it's ready
> 3) When we propose to retire/move code from trunk into unreleased, we need
> to have consensus.
> I'm pretty keen on 3). I recently found it's pretty changeling to find where
> some code lives now :-(.

The decision to have an unreleased folder was a totally separate
discussion/decision to moving the samples out of trunk. The unreleased
discussion and folder creation happened back in October/November last
year. The decision to move the samples out of trunk to be fixed up and
use an RTC approach to moving them back happened just last month.
Neither of those had anything like a formal vote.

Our users have said its not good our releases are full of samples that
don't work, or which demonstrate Tuscany/SCA incorrectly, or that all
work in different inconsistent ways. We had a long discussion on the
ML about what to do and me and Florian and Mike and Simon L and Simon
N all agreed with trying this new approach to the samples. We spent a
long time trying to find points of consensus, you and Luciano did not
participate in that discussion, and it feels like now you think we're
trying to scam you or something.

We're just trying this new approach, it may work, it may not, it might
only be temporary, its certainly not a rigid set in stone approach and
its completely open to modifications or alternatives - do you or
Luciano have any suggestions?

   ...ant

Reply via email to