Brian Moseley wrote:
Angela Schreiber wrote:
i felt quite uneasy with some of the changes commited
by brian yesterday and tried to express myself replying
to the commit-mails (sorry for spaming those that are
not involved).
but i was not sure how those conflicts should be resolved.
since i feel responsible for the jcr-server, i changed
a few things back, i considered to be not correct... but
i don't know, whether this is even allowed....
anyway, i'd like to raise the question, how such
conflicts should be handled... so far, there were
no such issues within the jackrabbit list, since every
commiter has some sort of area of responsibility. i just
remember one single incident.
i've been watching apache projects for many years, and i don't recall
ever having seen "owners" of particular pieces of code. my expectation
when i was given commit access to jackrabbit was that i would be an
equal contributor.
i'm also used to apache projects working on a commit-then-review basis.
but maybe i haven't been paying close enough attention.
as i mentioned in another message, i fully expect to have a lot of back
and forth initially as i come to understand angela's design more fully.
that's natural and no problem to me. i also expect to have to back out
some changes when the concensus is that they are wrong.
in the case of jcr-server, i'm not sure how to build concensus and
resolve differences when there are only two of us who are actively
committing to that subproject.
of course, if the intention is for angela to be the authoritative owner
of jcr-server, then concensus isn't really an issue, and i'll have to
learn how to be more persuasive when i want changes made ;)
Correct: the ASF owns the code, nobody else.
That said, if Angela believes that it's a trivial change that might not
upset Brian, she should just go ahead: use commit-then-review as much as
you can.
And even when you think Brian might not understand what's going on and
why you changed something, please state so in the logs or, even better,
in the comments.
As far as subjective details as code formatting or variable names, it is
up to Brian to follow the existing conventions and failing to do so
would entitle Angela to clean it up for consistency, at least in the
same file.
Would Brian commit a bunch of code and Angela a few patches, the thing
would be reversed.
no, there is no default for subjective details and there shouldn't be
one, don't even go there, just do what you feel appropriate and please
try to avoid putting your ego on when you do so.
At the end of the day, be strict in what you send and be tolerant in
what you receive.
--
Stefano.
