On 2 November 2010 08:26, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 01/11/2010, at 6:42 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: > >> On 1 November 2010 21:37, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org> wrote: >>> On 2010-11-01 22:10, Stephen Connolly wrote: >>>> Then -1 the commits. >>>> >>>> We have a commit first, ask forgiveness second policy in maven last time I >>>> checked >>> >>> So do you think that it's OK for someone to pull the rug from under your >>> feet, while you are working on something? >>> >>> (as in my work on the Stage Plugin) >> >> I think it's rude / bad form, but we all have the ability to >> >> svn merge . -c -1000563 >> svn ci -m "putting the rug back under my feet" >> >> or whatever revision number it was >> >> and ultimately, the Apache Maven policy is review after commit, this >> kind of thing can happen with review after commit... the only >> difference is the scale with respect to the refactoring... one could >> argue that the refactoring I made in surefire (to pool common code >> between failsafe and surefire) was worse than a simple folder >> copy/delete operation [because it rendered patches a lot harder to >> apply if they were pre-refactoring, whereas a folder relocation can be >> recovered from with either a svn sw to the new location and commit, or >> else by reverse merging from a clean checkout] > > ISTR you asking first, and waiting, which was a sensible thing to do given > the reasons you've said. > > Sure, version control affords us the benefit of backing out anything easily, > which is great. But I'm sure the spirit of that policy is to do it on already > decided or non-controversial changes. > > There's no need to be in a position where one of the most active committers > finds themselves having the rug pulled out from under their feet. >
I completely agree with you and Dennis that it was rude and inconsiderate... however, given the specific committer's habit of acting unilaterally I am not exactly surprised ;-) BUT in the absence of a formal process (for retirement of plugins but it applies to anything based in SCM), commit first is the default process of our community. That does not mean that for big changes which are potentially contentious one should not seek out consensus first (which would demand at least 72h notice) I guess the bit that irks me is we had first a consensus seeking mail followed (what seemed to me on my android phone) 10 minutes later by commits. Well in my view you cannot have your cake and eat it. Either you seek consensus (and take the 72h before acting) or you commit first and ask forgiveness second... (and take the heat of your actions if they are in haste) With all of the above, however, I will still defend somebody acting with commit first where there is a lack of process around making such changes.... we will have a policy/process now, so commit-first no-longer applies for plugin retirement IMHO -Stephen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
