On 11/6/14, 1:46 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >So far we had a couple of PMC members who consider the 3rd Party issue to >be blocking (but no indication they will provide a patch) and a couple >who don't think it is blocking. Normally may be enough for a vote to pass >but with the "no RC" process that's unclear. > >Looks like we have a choice: >- Someone can provide a patch for this. Is anyone wiling to do so? IMO, we don’t know what code to change without agreement within the project as to whether to import-load or use Marshall Plan, then agreement from the third-parties to do their part. >- Drop 3rd party support from this release, and hopefully have it in a >future release. > >Doping 3rd party support could be achieved by having an empty 3rd party >XML so there may be be no real need for another release candidate / vote. >The readme/release_notes say adding support for 3rd party examples that >would be still be correct we would just not have any on the Tour De Flex >web site. Seems like if we drop 3rd-party support, we should remove 3rdparty.xml from the source package and update the RELEASE_NOTES. To say in the RELEASE_NOTES that there is support and then not support it on the flex.a.o version doesn’t feel right to me. Or at minimum, mention in RELEASE_NOTES that 3rd-party support isn’t fully implemented. In the “no RC” process we’re practicing, there is no new RC to cut and upload to dist, or VOTE to cancel until this discussion reaches the point where it is pretty clear there are enough PMC votes to ship. We should be able to make the changes to RELEASE_NOTES and/or 3rdparty.xml and any other place and the nightly build will pick it up in a few hours and we can make sure we like it. -Alex
