I agree with Romain. In the first time with only a few developers we
should concentrate on speed. Later we can/must/should define a more
formal way for our commit workflow. From my point of view it depends on
the maturity of the software.
BTW, independent of the way we choose, we need a plan. But as Anatole
already wrote, we will start the discussion tomorow.
wdyt?
Bye,
Oliver
Am 26.11.14 22:21, schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
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
--
N Oliver B. Fischer
A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
P +49 30 44793251
M +49 178 7903538
E [email protected]
S oliver.b.fischer
J [email protected]
X http://xing.to/obf
