Luciano Resende wrote:
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:10 PM, ant elder <[email protected]> wrote:
Luciano, you still haven't really said what it is you would like to
see done to get a release you'd be ok with. What we decided to do was
move all the samples out of trunk start cleaning them up and move them
back with consensus, ie email asking what people think could be
changed or fixed and when everyone is happy then move them back. That
is all.
Sorry, members of the community expressed that would be good to have
samples on a release, I worked on the sample I wanted to see in the
release, made sure it was working from a binary distribution, and
notified the community [1] My expectation was that, if there was any
issues, suggestions, etc, people would mention that on the thread, and
I'd work on it... but what I got was to have the samples moved out of
trunk [2].
I really don't know what to do, or what to say... because all the good
things about "Apache Way" seems to NOT be working in here.
[1] http://tuscany.markmail.org/thread/dqnoslswasw2vofb
[2] http://tuscany.markmail.org/thread/mhudyb2n5x62qmul
In the previous discussion on samples I gave my view of what's needed for
a sample to be included in a release (see [1]). I believe that the store
sample meets all of these requirements. (Disclaimer: I haven't run this
sample to make sure that it works.) If it does work, then I am +1 on
including it in the next 2.0-betaX release.
Also in [1], I said that a new sample that doesn't yet meet the mandatory
release requirements should go in unreleased/ initially. AFAICT, the store
sample does meet the mandatory release requirements, so I'm not sure why
it was moved to unreleased/.
Regarding ant support, I said in [2] that some of the samples should have
ant scripts, though I didn't think this was mandatory for every sample.
Simon
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg15567.html
[2] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg15679.html
