A branch (whether 2.x) as you already suggested would simply do. "perimeter" e.g. having mainly one person contributing to a piece of the codebase, well, BrowserMap is a good example. There's practically nobody other than Radu ever touching that. I was hoping to get some odd things or redundancies like /trunk/project/trunk out of the repository, but it turned out the way GitHub and Apache SVN are synced there caused this weird naming. So I rolled back the changes. No fighting or struggeling in that case, which shows, it mainly comes from just one team member (and it's not me) where things get less professional and more polemic.
While Eberhard has a similar role as Radu on the .NET side, I used my recent .NET responsibilities at current clients to test this client and found bugs or issues. Which are now fixed. Also no false pride or shouting from Eberhard about these adjustments or him being upset about the first time people at a conference also saw "his" client. While it may be not so trivial on the .NET side, for Java and other languages (just see the Ruby example) having more than one CI instance to verify each branch should do. And since DeviceMap isn't the only project I am involved in (despite many different ideas, just look at Tamaya-dev, you won't find a single case where anybody there including myself would insult others or rather take technically sound critique as a personal insult all the time;-) it introduced a "Sandbox" for new ideas and integrating with other APIs and frameworks: https://github.com/apache/incubator-tamaya/tree/master/sandbox That or the "modules" concept also used by DeltaSpike and other projects would make it relatively easy to separate the modules also by who's responsible. As long as it builds on a CI server. Tamaya has at least 2 separate branch builds by now, and projects like DeltaSpike have several dozens. Including some that build only examples. Cheers, Werner On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Werner Keil <[email protected]> > wrote: > > ...I don't see a problem to have him as committer/PMC member, should he > decide > > to stay, but e.g. Bertrand until someone really qualified should > volunteer > > again was clearly a better choice to act as PMC chair.... > > If that helps, I am open to be interim PMC chair if Reza agrees to > stay and try my "perimeter" experiment. > > -Bertrand (replying to the on-topic parts) >
