On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:49:28 +0100, Thorsten Scherler <[email protected]> wrote: > El vie, 16-01-2009 a las 11:20 +0100, Florent André escribió: > ... >> >> Yes, this is also my idea. In the ASF submission process, a person have > to >> be "accept" to can write on the svn, he have to "proof" that he is a > good >> and implicated people in the project. I don't want to mean that is a bad >> concept : it permit a very good quality to ASF project. >> >> But, it don't allow some "occasional" devel to share their modules (like >> rudolf korhummel I think). > > If you feel that you have a module that is worth sharing then the best > way is to donate it to the lenya project and we add it to the > repository.
Yes, but this solution don't facilitate this usecase : Two (or plus) lenya users want to develop the same module : an svn is a good solution for co-develop this module. So, they have to have a "personnal" svn server to do that, with this "potential" risk : - creation of many svn server with many adress - few visibility of each site module (if one site groups all modules = one address = more visibility of each module) - increase the difficulty for reuse a still no-maintain module > > This way we can make sure that the modules are > a) compatible with the ASF license > b) ensure community support around the module > c) ensure minimum quality of code I agree, this bullets points are the strong of ASF. In my mind, the donation to the lenya project occur when the module is "mature". The "modules site" is like a lab : he is useful for the cooperative construction of the module, and when he is stable, this module is put into the lenya project. > > ... >> To precise my site idea and to respond to Vik, I imagine a more >> "development cooperative" tools than wiki (in fact : svn). >> >> I think to something like that : >> - a user create an Account on the "lenya mod sharing" site. So user >> automatically have an svn account >> - After login on the site, a form allow the user to create a new > "project". >> Here he can decide the write access in his project (all, restrict to > name 1 >> / name 2 /, restrict to group1 / group2, ...). >> - After form submission, an svn folder is created, codev can begin. >> >> - For "visitors", the site presents all available modules or templates > than >> can be downloable. > > Open questions: > - who has write access to which part of the svn? Is like Apache Labs > where everybody has write access to any project? Or would each module be > restricted to the creator? In my mind : We have an svn repository and in this repository we have one folder for each modules : - repository --- module 1 ----- trunk ----- branches ----- tags ----- exp --- module 2 ----- trunk ----- branches ----- tags ----- exp So my answers are : > - Is like Apache Labs where everybody has write access to any project? No, the creator of a module can choose who have the write access on his module (like described above) > - who has write access to which part of the svn? Creator and co-developer of module1 have write access to module1 > - Or would each module be restricted to the creator? This is "open-restrict" on each module... > - who guarantees that all license issues are met? We can imagine an advertise when the user create a new module... the creator can be the man who guarantee that. > > - who manage this project? Project management > and infrastructure? I would like to do that... I'm not sure to have all the require competencies... but I can try :) > who makes sure that people do not abuse the site. The good spirits of people and the black-list... > > - where does communication happen? Excuse me, but I don't understand this question. ++ > >> As says rudolf.korhummel, "If this is possible with the apache > environment >> it would be fine", and great. > > If you want the endorsement of the ASF then we need to create something > here. > > salu2 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
