On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Apache doesn't let anyone commit any code they like, community or no. So > there must be a point on the spectrum between accepting anything and > accepting nothing we have to find. I only happen to think we will need to > have a stronger bias towards wanting coherent, tested, documented code > coming in as the project evolves. Not now if you like -- but by "1.0", or > else what does that mean? >
That makes a bit of sense... my > > Ruminations remain fine. We have patches and branches and still ample > wiggle > room to commit and collaborate iteratively in HEAD between releases. > Fine. > I just think you get what you ask for in a case like this. if bits of ideas > are accepted into the project, we'll end up with lots of people's bits. If > the bar is higher for quality and consistent, I believe people do match the > standard they see and hit that bar. We're already talking about people who > want to do what it takes to contribute something. > That is fine for the production ready things, but not everything springs from the brow of Zeus fully formed. There needs to be a mechanism whereby new things can evolve to this state. Perhaps we need the additive inverse of the attic. An incubator space, if you will, that can be used to add new capabilities for community commentary and improvement. The life cycle will be that things in the incubator will have to be accepted into Mahout or move into the attic. That allows some of both world views. This is similar in many ways to the function of the Lucene contrib directory, but that function has always confused people. I would rather just call it incubator. Otherwise I don't know what difference there is between 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 1.0, > 2.0? > Back compatibility.
