Danny,
That sounds like what I was waiting for. I'll commit the code to the proposals directory (where it will replace the previous version). --Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: Danny Angus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 9:19 AM > To: James Developers List > Subject: RE: Feedback IMAP > > The idea is pretty much that anything any commiter deems worthy of trying > can be commited to proposals. > Once a commiter is happy with the stability, functionality, regression > issues of the proposal thay can propose that it be added to the HEAD, at > which point conventions suggest a lazy vote (abstention is acceptable) > with > a reasonable time to respond (I like a week, to be sure everyone has seen > the notice) can be followed by the proposer moving the code into the HEAD, > where all the practices governing commits to the head apply as usual(it > must > always build, commits should have meaningful logs etc). Alternatively it > can > also be possible to copy some of the repository files on the server. > > d. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 09 August 2002 16:43 > > To: James Developers List > > Subject: RE: Feedback IMAP > > > > > > Vincent, > > > > I think we all agree. I can appreciate not incorporating it into the > > mainstream tree until it has been tested. I figure that since the > current > > non-functional IMAP is in the proposal section, it can't hurt to > > replace it > > with Sascha's new code, and instructions for how to do a JAMES build > with > > it. > > > > Peter is also in favor of this, but wants confirmation from one of the > > old-timers, since we don't appear to have a written policy. I did come > > across these messages: > > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02717.html > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01713.html > > > > which seem to confirm that the proposals tree is for experimental > > code, and > > that it should be just fine to update the existing IMAP code in the > > proposals tree. I think it also confirms Peter's view that WHEN > > it has been > > tested enough, that it can be moved (back) into the main tree. > > > > --- Noel > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vincent Keunen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 3:30 > > To: James Developers List > > Subject: Re: Feedback IMAP > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm not very experienced in the rules either, but I'd like to point out > > that many of us have wished for a long time that the IMAP code would > > evolve. We now have the luck of having someone working on that code > > with enthusiasm (thanks, Sascha) and I think it's very important to have > > Sascha feel that his work is really appreciated by integrating it into > > the code base. Of course, we don't want to break the system, but aren't > > there ways to do this without waiting for the committers to go through > > the code thoroughly (no critic on them, they do a great work but maybe > > are a bit too busy for the moment)? > > > > Aren't there some tests (ala XP) that could be run (by other people, > > maybe Sascha himself) and that would give confidence in the code > written? > > > > Just trying to manage the psychological side of our James developers... > > ;-) > > > > Peter M. Goldstein wrote: > > > > >Noel, > > > > > >I've certainly got no objection, but I'm new to the committer role and > > >don't know all the rules. Wouldn't want to do it without the ok of > > >someone with more experience. > > > > > >--Peter > > > > > > > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > >>Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2002 10:17 AM > > >>To: James Developers List > > >>Subject: RE: Feedback IMAP > > >> > > >>Peter & Charles, > > >> > > >>I don't know the convention, but can't his code be committed into the > > >>proposal tree (where the old version is now), so that other interested > > >>parties can play with it, without impacting the mainstream code? > > >> > > >> --- Noel > > >> > > >> > > >>-- > > >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev- > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev- > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > !try; do() > > -- > > Vincent Keunen, Ir, http://vincent.keunen.net > > Manex, rue Wagner 93, BE-4100 Boncelles, Belgium > > Our site: http://www.manex.be > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
