I agree that in theory the processes should remain. But: * there is no official list of such processes. I only know the ones I interacted with. (I remembered how hard I had to ask long ago to clarify how the release branching process works).
* they should be filtered anyhow based on Apache compatibility and/or replaced by existing Apache processes, plus * these processes were not decided by the community at large, but were mostly an emanation of the core Sun/Oracle developer group. Which means that they are not necessarily a good fit for the new situation. --emi Pe 20 iun. 2017, la 12:03, Neil C Smith <[email protected]> a scris: > >> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:39 AM Emilian Bold <[email protected]> wrote: >> I do. The previous API Review had some logic to it. I don't believe we >> can do without it entirely. > > Or at all! I agree with much of what you suggest, but I'm interested to turn > that around - why do you believe things need to change now / what aspects are > not going to meet Apache compliance? > > My point was that I don't see the point in changing processes that have > worked for the project for years right now, unless it's something where our > hand is forced. Surely better to establish a regular review of processes > (quarterly, post-releases, ?) and then evolve things where need be? IMO this > is the wrong time to be changing too much. > > Best wishes, > > Neil > -- > Neil C Smith > Artist & Technologist > www.neilcsmith.net > > Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding - www.praxislive.org
