On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Yep - I would suggest then we keep it simple and have
>
> /geronimmo/sandbox
Fine with me
> /geronimo/sandbox/misc/SoC
I think we agreed this one is going to operate through patches.
> /geronimo/sandbox/donations/trifork
> /geronimo/sandbox/donations/ibm
I would prefer a mixed name or feature name rather than a company
name -- so perhaps trifork-corba or corba, and web-console or
ibm-web-console, or something like that.
> I'd be happy w/ separate ACLs to let people work as fast and
> "normally" as possible, w/o having to wait for patches to be
> accepted. There's no danger with SVN. That said, I'd go w/ patches
> if that was the consensus.
Well, I don't want to offend anyone, but I can envision a scenario
where we don't see eye to eye with a submitter on architecture or features
or whatever. If the submitter charges ahead with their own changes in
their own style and that turns out to be unacceptable to us, then the
whole module is wasted. If they submit patches instead, we are free to
accept them or hold off and massage the code into something more
appropriate to us. I am not saying this is the expected case, which is
why I only have a minor preference for patches, but it would be nice to
account for.
Aaron
