On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Simon Nash <n...@apache.org> wrote: > Luciano Resende wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Raymond Feng <enjoyj...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I like the "commit then review" approach much better. When we add samples >>> into trunk, we have the responsibility to keep them working (in the right >>> way). >> >> +1, And this might really be the reason for having this whole >> discussion. In Tuscany, usually people would dump samples into samples >> and only look into them when during the release time. Having a reduced >> number of samples will help, but sample ownership might be the main >> issue here. >> > I agree that sample code shouldn't be dumped into trunk with the expectation > that someone will get it into proper shape for the next release. > > Regarding ownership, this word might be interpreted in different ways by > different people. If it means that someone who commits a new sample should > do the whole job of making sure that it meets all the requirements for > samples in trunk, I'm +1 for this. Another interpretation of ownership > could > be to regard a particular individual as responsible for maintaining > particular > samples (or other parts of the codebase) on an ongoing basis. In Tuscany we > don't have this kind of personal ownership but instead regard the whole > community as responsible, and I wouldn't want to see that change. > > For non-sample code that's added to trunk, I think we have general agreement > that the new code needs to build OK, have unit tests, and pass its unit > tests. > > For sample code that's added to trunk, all the above apply and there are > additional requirements that the sample includes documentation describing > what it does, how to run it, and the expected results from running it. > It's also a requirement that the sample runs correctly and does what the > documentation says it will do. > > Simon > >
What we know from recent and past events is that there isn't really that much agreement on many things and that people may get upset if things are taken out of trunk. If you read back in the sample thread even something like the requirement to have a sample readme doesn't have universal support, and, if a readme is so banal that it doesn't add much over what you already get from the sample name then the existence of one doesn't really make the world that much of a better place. I think one of the most important things we can do is try to keep each other happy. We've a relatively small dev community so we should do what we can to keep everyone involved and productive and find ways to make space for everyone to do what we they think is important or useful. ...ant
