Marcel Offermans wrote:
Richard S. Hall wrote:
Hot on the heels of the PPMC list, here is the start of a proposal
for Felix roles and process definitions. Much of it was lifted from
Jakarta, since they seemed to be structured similarly to what I think
is reasonable...it is modified from Jakarta, however.
I'm assuming you're talking about:
http://docs.safehaus.org/display/OSGI/Felix+Community+Roles+and+Processes+Proposal
D'oh! Yes, I forgot to send the link! Yes, you are correct Marcel, that
is the link.
Please give me feedback. I would like to discuss any feedback, come
to agreement, and incorporate it back into the document so we can
eventually have an official PPMC vote on accepting it as our policy.
About adding names to the source: I think that's a good idea, so at
least if you look at the source you can see who created it. Of course
svn blame like reports give a much better picture, but that takes more
effort too.
There was a long discussion about this on the Harmony mailing list some
time back...I think they end up against it, since it is a pain in the
ass. It also creates situations where people are just modifying source
files so that they can add their name. I guess I lean slightly against
it, but it would be nice if we had some easy way of creating a report
for who contributed and what to a given artifact.
In theory, adding the role of "tester" might be a good idea, but I'm
not sure if we can find any. :)
A tester would certainly fall into the role of contributor. I imagine if
the tester also submitted patches, then he/she could fall into committer
eventually as well. So, I am not sure that we need a separate role for
that, but we could add words to the text to explicitly include testing
as a contribution.
-> richard
