On 11/13/05, Laurie Harper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well I initially proposed it back in September and took the lack of > objections to imply agreement...
I think Niall's and Joe's comments, while not strictly "objections", did imply some disagreement, which Hubert has affirmed. If a committer comments on a ticket, I think it's important that we address those concerns before applyng a patch. Code changes are subject to consensus, which means that all the committers (or at least PMC members) have to agree, or at least not disagree. Why do we all have to agree? Because we are all on the hook to support any changes made to the codebase. We all own all of the codebase, not just the parts we change ourselves. If one of us is unavailable, the rest have to be ready to pick up the slack. Of course, Struts is a "commit-then-review" project, so it's perfectly all right to make changes first, and then see if people like it. But, when we do this, we just have to be prepared to answer any concerns afterwards (as we are doing now), which could include reversing the change, or implementing the change in an totally different way. Meanwhile, I'm setting up the Extras subproject now. One idea would be to put a "CGDynaActionForm" class there. We might want to move other very optional classes there too, and keep only the "cannonical" classes in the Core (or Action Framework) subproject. -Ted. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
