For what it is worth: I see something beautiful emerging. +1
Best regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecha...@gmail.com> wrote: > Le 22/04/15 12:28, Steve Moyer a écrit : > > I think we've spent enough time rehashing the past ... > > Absolutely. > > > let me just say > > that I think things would have gone a lot differently if there'd been an > > easy way to provide a repository branch for us to check code into. > Sadly, this is not the way it works at The ASF. Let me tell you though > that it would have been a matter of two weeks to proceed with the > original injection of the code 2 years ago. > > > On > > the other hand, I can certainly understand why you don't want to change > > your infrastructure every time someone pops into the IRC channel - SVN > > doesn't make it so easy to limit permissions and you probably see a > > hundred people a month come by then disappear (like I seemed to do). > We now have git, too, and that makes it extra easy to inject code, > keeping the full history. > > But it's also a matter of voting in the new committer. We are pretty > liberal about this, it's just a vote. Serioulsy, this is really a > limited task, with a few paperwork : > - we vote the proposal and the committer(s) > - if the vote is positive, then the new committer(s) are required to > fill a ICLA or a CCLA (if they are working for a company) > - once the I/CCLA has been received and registred, the account is requested > - when the account is created, we assign the correct rights and we are > done. > > Since 2013, the process is even faster, and I would say that it can be > done in 3 to 5 days, max. > > > > > I'm also not debating the use of the work forked ... just pointing out > > that Kiran and I decided *together* our approaches, while both valid > > ways to tackle the problem, were not compatible enough to live in one > > project. There was a reason we went looking for an OSS Java-based SCIM > > project ... we can chat on IRC in a couple hours (once I'm in the > office). > I think that it would be a good idea to expose the difference of both > approaches. I can understand you have a slightly divergence from the > spec, and that it makes it a different beast, while Kiran deicded to > stick to the specs (AFAIU), but pease, feel free to correct me if I am > wrong. > > I'm quite sure that Kiran - or any one of us ! - would be pleased to see > a better version of what we are working on to replace what we are > currently coding : I do think that pride should never be a criterium > when it comes to code. > > > > Assuming Shawn (my boss) still wants to push forward with Apache > > Directory, there is the issue of having two SCIM implementations in one > > project ... I guess the value propositions of each would need to be > > clearly stated? > Absolutely. For those of us (and that includes me) who are not knees > deep into SCIM, that would be extremely helpful. > > > > I'd like to see wide-spread SCIM adoption, so we > > certainly don't want to spread any confusion. > > +1 > > Thanks Steve ! > >
