Andrew Savory napisał(a): > Hi, > > > Eeeeh, I hope not! I'd worry about the health of the overall codebase if > no-one else is building allblocks! Is this why continuum is not failing > when it should be?
My opinion is that we should view situation with blocks in more "blockish" way. Blocks in C2.2 are supposed to be quite independent. They can (and should) have its own release cycles, stability factor and interest of community. Blocks that are outside the default build are those with probably lesser interest of community at the moment. They might be also some problems with dependencies but those are only *temporary* obstacles. Of course, if someone puts the effort to make a block up-to-date with the rest (so it does not break the build) and *some* other folks will agree that are going to support the block, it can be included in default build. This marks block as hmmm... core? Let it be core :-) Now situation should be that it's whole community's responsibility to support these core blocks. Other blocks could be supported by some folks interested in doing that, but community should not be forced to do that. And we should really state which blocks are core, which are stable and which are just orphan. Orphan indicates that the block lacks enough interest. As far as I remember, similar ideas arisen many times before but what outlined above is *my opinion*. -- Grzegorz Kossakowski http://reflectingonthevicissitudes.wordpress.com/
