I totally agree with Tim POV. Even I you don't want to become a commiter (yeah, they have some duties and they give some of their time for free) helping them to do their job is the best way to accelerate commiting. Especially if you have already tested things (means patches I guess) in you own code. I'm quite sure your help would be very valuable !
Jacques ----- Message d'origine ----- De : Tim Ruppert À : [email protected] Envoyé : samedi 21 avril 2007 17:47 Objet : Re: Ofbiz Contribution Proposal Jonathon - as has always been the case - the role of reviewing "complex" patches does not fall strictly on the committers - it falls on the entire community. The committers then have the role of putting the code into the trunk. If you are so concerned that valid works are not being put back into the trunk aggressively enough (which I think that everyone who spends time over here would agree), could you try the proactive approach of looking at more patches and letting the community know which ones you think are tested well enough and offer enough value to go back into the trunk? That would be a GREAT first step and a very nice change of pace from the aggressive tone you seem to think is appropriate. Cheers, Tim -- Tim Ruppert HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com o:801.649.6594 f:801.649.6595 On Apr 20, 2007, at 10:49 PM, Jonathon -- Improov wrote: David, > "We" do not now, nor have we ever, turned away a contribution because it > was complex. Very well, I'll just use the word "you" then. I take it that you do not turn away contributions because they were complex. The question from me would be whether you do or do not turn away, knowingly or not, contributions that are valid but too complex for review. It's not rhetorical, but you're free to do your own sanity/verification checks on that supposed phenomenon and deem it rhetorical or invalid. > Could you do us all a big favor Jonathon? Your comments seem to be > fairly consistent along these lines. I think what would be helpful to > you, and to anyone reading and agreeing with your comments, is to step > back and try to explain why things are the way they are. Feel free to > share that with the group for a sanity check if you'd like. I'm not so sure of the "why" of things, but am only more certain of the "what" of things. Things are the way they are, no matter how we interpret the "why". So, for now, I continue to merge in (to my own SVN) several contributions that are deemed too difficult to review/merge by the committers. I continue to keep such enhancements in step with updates from OFBiz trunk. And I continue in my failure(?) to feed such "compatibilized/merged" enhancements back to OFBiz trunk even though they really are the same license. And the phenomenon of several of us (incompatible contributors?) holding on to our own enhancements will continue. Some of us may not know how to keep in step with OFBiz trunk updates; others may. Those of us who can keep in step will continue to benefit from OFBiz progress, but be unable to feed the benefit back to OFBiz. There will still be enhancements out there that are kept away/apart from OFBiz. That's the way of things? Or maybe not? I stand corrected. I think I am "helping" OFBiz in the wrong way. I'll stop that. :) Thanks for reminding me. I was waiting to dump the loads of my enhancements into your trunk, but I think I should take a sanity check for now. Anyway, there needs to be at least one stabilizing branch (save point, so to speak) before we can go full steam with the trunk. And there's still no such branch yet. Jonathon David E. Jones wrote: On Apr 20, 2007, at 9:04 PM, Jonathon -- Improov wrote: We shouldn't turn away complex contributions anymore. "We" do not now, nor have we ever, turned away a contribution because it was complex. I myself have loads of enhancements (mostly to widget module) that I feel uneasy about releasing to the community, simply because of this odd use of trunk: it's used like a slow-moving release branch that is unable to handle introductions of radical enhancements. Yet, this somewhat slow-moving trunk isn't still enough and focused enough on achieving release-quality stability. It's the worst of both worlds: it's not rapid enough to allow for radical progress, and not calm and focused-on-cleaning-up enough to produce a stable release for non-OFBiz developers. Could you do us all a big favor Jonathon? Your comments seem to be fairly consistent along these lines. I think what would be helpful to you, and to anyone reading and agreeing with your comments, is to step back and try to explain why things are the way they are. Feel free to share that with the group for a sanity check if you'd like. -David
