On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 for the DeltaSpike workflow as well.

If we can do it in a way that doesn't involve patch files, and instead
uses pull requests to get code in, I'd be ok with it.

>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Wednesday, 26 November 2014, 22:22, Romain Manni-Bucau 
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > Hi
>>
>> -1 for tomee one whatever we choose (too complicated for few gain or
>> illegal gains @apache if used).
>>
>> DS is nice IMHO however I think we can even skip review step for now -
>> ie we have a master, then we'll get "tags" and "maintenance
>> branches".
>> Idea is to make project evolving quickly at the beginning where I
>> guess we'll get few committers then when the project will be more
>> active we can change it.
>>
>> wdyt?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> @rmannibucau
>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>> https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>>
>> 2014-11-26 22:01 GMT+01:00 John D. Ament <[email protected]>:
>>>  All,
>>>
>>>  I'd like to bring up the discussion around commit workflow.  Basically,
>> how
>>>  does source code get into the apache repo?
>>>
>>>  There are many options out there for projects to use.  I'll link to a
>> few
>>>  below (all existing apache projects):
>>>
>>>  http://wiki.apache.org/jclouds/How%20to%20Contribute
>>>  http://deltaspike.apache.org/suggested-git-workflows.html
>>>
>> http://usergrid.readthedocs.org/en/latest/presentations-and-videos/presentations.html#how-to-contribute-to-apache-usergrid
>>>  http://tomee.apache.org/dev/source-code.html
>>

Reply via email to