Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
Regarding your payloads example and 2.1 vs. 3.0, there is a simpler approach,
and one that we have
>pretty much (unintentionally?) been using. Larger chunks of work take
longer,
need more eyes to check them, to test them locally, iron out bugs, etc. and
finally
>approve and commit them. Therefore, while this work is in progress,
it's all done
via patches in JIRA, and people's local repositories. No commits until the
solid patch is available.
Doesn't this approach lead to less eyes on the code? An open source
trunk is usually a development line where early commits are encouraged
to enable people to run new code easily as well as looking at the code.
Having useful code only in patches puts up an additional barrier to
people looking at them.
How does this scheme work when there are multiple outstanding features,
seems very unlikely many folks will download all patches & try them
together?
Thanks,
Dan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
