On Fri, Apr 6, 2018, 2:36 PM Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 6, 2018, 3:01 AM 최우제 (Uze Choi) <uzc...@samsung.com> wrote: > >> Sorry for late response due to mail system filtering. I didn’t ware of it. >> >> >> >> I think open source project need to have two most important quality >> factors which are extensibility for more usage and maintainability. >> >> Of course some project could be the optimization is most important. >> >> It looks important that we keep the good balance considering various >> factors. >> >> I think no one change for other request is not way to move on where open >> source goes. >> > I beg your forgiveness, but I do not understand this sentence. Can you > please elaborate? > >> If my change proposal is against current concept or big shift from >> current architecture, I get it. But this is not. >> > I don't think architecture is the issue. To me the issue is feeping > creaturism (creeping featurism). > This is useful reading, even though it is rather old: https://clojure.org/news/2012/02/17/clojure-governance The general principle, which I propose for iotivity, is simple : be _extremely_ conservative about accepting changes to the core - but be very accepting about contribs. Gregg > > Gregg > >> >>
_______________________________________________ iotivity-dev mailing list iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev
