On Jul 6, 2006, at 11:54 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
On 7/7/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is applied.
:-)
Took longer than expected because I happened to switch to a terminal
that was set to use JDK 1.5 and I did not realize it... until a few
hours later after I was pulling my hair out wondering why the patch
god hates me so much.
It's because it needs a solution as I think you won't be alone in your
pain of applying patches/changes that are incompatible with the unix
patch command.
I think it would be much better if the person who makes a change is
not the one who commits it to trunk, but the last PMCer who voted for
it. And a branch the change is built from is established. The solution
has such a good effect that the person who works on changes don't have
to worry about the commit date until it's rejected when (s)he or
anyone else will fix it and a vote starts over (with 24-hour time
period). Another good effect is that knowing the revisions a change
that's being voted, one can continue his/her work without worrying
about disrupting the vote process as the revisions are still in the
branch. Phew, I do like the idea! ;-)
WDYT?
I think this will have an extremely debilitating and discouraging
effect on everyone involved: no one can commit their own code. "No
code ownership" is fine, but IMO everyone likes to commit their own
work and say to themselves "I did it". I think it will also tend to
give the PMC members even more work to do, which they already don't
have time for, and is likely to widen the divide between committers
and PMC members. It will also be IMO rather confusing: despite
review by 3 PMC members I expect the changes will still be best
understood by their author, and if the author is NEVER the committer,
it will be nearly impossible to find out who was responsible.
non-binding
david jencks
--jason
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
http://www.laskowski.net.pl
