Hi First, please understand I hold you in incredibly high regard, and apologize for causing any frustration... You and Andy have created an amazing software tool that I'm basing my business on, and you've given it away. I love that! As you can see, your efforts are now multiplying in to a system that has a life of its own, which will eventually change the face of many businesses throughout the world.
During this process, you've needed to exercise great control in choosing what to allow into the project, and what to reject. Since I often update my production system to the svn head, I'm very glad someone is there watching, and if you think about it, it makes sense that access has been very limited to just the professionals that have devoted themselves to the project. However, as it grows, there are more and more newbies that want to help in their little way. Many *non-committers* who have wanted to give back to the project have been stifled and frustrated, often because their contributions were not appropriate, but sometimes simply because the committers are too busy to review/test/correct their contributions. In other cases, the resultant solutions are too specific to just their business, or as a employee, the business although willing to donate the code back, was not willing to devote the time needed to make the consumable by the project at large. So, what can we do to create a space where non-committers can share their bits with the community? Please understand, we are agreed that neither of us would want their contributions running on a system. - The source forge sandbox isn't really a good fit, because, as Chris has researched, the legal ramifications of donating it back to the project outweigh the benefits begotten from the group effort. - Forcing developers to work alone isn't working very well. - A sandbox with lots of committers isn't going to work. Thanks for explaining that in your e-mail, I didn't realize this wasn't workable till now. - Jira isn't working. - The wiki could possibly work, but it doesn't go through the legal process with each submission, and I cringe even thinking of trying to work with code in wiki. Eek. - Even using the wiki, to catalog which jira issues are "in play" is unwieldy. Patch nightmare actually. David, can you think of way to make a space in this community where the new/non-polished committers can easily share and play together with their ideas where they won't hurt the bigger project until the components are well proven? Would it work to have a sandbox that is managed by the existing committers, or perhaps a few new committers? As a committer, you wouldn't need to give nearly the same amount of time and attention to trying to make sure the commitment met best practices, free of bugs, etc. Any developer could share their stuff that they've implemented for their business, or other neat components. And, since the commitments would be in svn on the other side of the "Donate to the Apache Foundation legal radio button, it'd be easy for these developers to collaborate and slowly bring unworkable buggy messes into gold. Finally, users could easily find and try the components without mucking with patch files, etc. Thanks Daniel On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 00:45 -0700, David E. Jones wrote: > Okay, I just wrote a huge thing and deleted it. There might have been > good stuff in there, but I am really frustrated because I've said it > all before and based on the comments from Chris it doesn't seem like > anything it making it out there. > > If you're not a lawyer, then reference documents and processes > already established. > > I'm not even going to bother going into detail unless people are > willing to: > > 1. describe their understanding of how what they want to do would be > done under current policy > 2. describe why that doesn't work for what you want to do > 3. describe how the existing processes need to changed in order to > accommodate it > > A sandbox is a BAD BAD BAD BAD IDEA. Like you mentioned Daniel it > would create a huge mess. I'm afraid one of two things would happen: > > 1. nothing > 2. a lot > > In the case of number 1 it's not worth the effort to set it up. In > the case of #2 it would required more effort to administer and > monitor than we have resources for in OFBiz. There is no way I'd even > think about doing this under the ASF umbrella because I am not > willing to take on the responsibility of vetting a large number of > committers and recommending them as committers in the ASF, which is > BIG DEAL, and a responsibility and some people seem to be forgetting > that. > > If you want to be a committer you have to help with the project. You > have to take ownership of it, defend it, be committed to it, and so > on. Okay, now I'm doing what I was in the 2 page email I just deleted > and I'm stopping. > > If you want to know more about becoming and being a committer and > about contributing to OFBiz, READ THE DARN DOCUMENTS! > > I don't know WHY these questions are coming up here. Stop asking > them. Read the documents. I won't be baited into this any more. It's > a waste of time, and all based on supposition and not any real > problems or issues as far as I can see. > > If you develop something outside of OFBiz and want to contribute it, > here is the page describing how it works: > > http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html > > This is basically a streamlined incubation process for code going > into existing projects. > > If you really want to help and be involved in the project it means > working on OTHER PEOPLE'S STUFF, NOT YOUR OWN! Yes, it makes it > easier to get your own stuff in but if that is all you're about > related to the project, then being a committer isn't for you. > > If you want to know more about contributing and being a committer, > read the docs: > > http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/mQ > http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/r > > If you want to know more about licensing and legal issues, read the > docs: > > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html > http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html > http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html > http://www.apache.org/foundation/licence-FAQ.html > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > > For a lot of good information, broaden the scope and study under: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/ > > These were not written because someone was looking for some > entertainment. They were written so things wouldn't have to be > explained over and over. > > I'm calling it a day now, as soon as I take care of some real issues, > and as long as my son with the flu doesn't throw up again. Sorry, > this is really frustrating, and really silly. Reality sucks, but we > all have to live with it. > > If people want to help, then help. Don't just ask for help. Start by > being a giver, not a taker. > > If this sounds a bit harsh, great! Go for a walk and think about how > things work in real life, then read it again. If you're still upset, > read it again. Then go read all of the documents referenced. Then if > you still have a question, send it on in, but PLEASE try to look at > it from the point of a MEMBER of the OFBiz community, and not a user > of OFBiz who really doesn't want to get involved. > > If you're asking "how are you going to solve this problem" then > you're asking the wrong question. If you want to participate as "how > can I solve this problem", if "I" can't, then do with "how can we > solve this problem". I don't mean that is what should be in your > email, I mean that is what should be in your head. If you can't find > an answer yourself that is 100% okay, just start a discussion and > accept what you asked for. > > If you don't like the answer explain why it doesn't work for you, > which brings us back to the beginning of this email... > > -David > > > On Jan 25, 2007, at 6:10 PM, Daniel Kunkel wrote: > > > David > > > > Can you explain your reticence to adding an Apache OFBiz sandbox where > > more members of the community could share their work? > > > > I can see this section possibly getting a disorganized over time with > > *junk*... but it can be deleted easily enough. As a top level project > > would it possible and better to organize a sub project for this? > > > > Thanks > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 12:41 -0800, Chris Howe wrote: > >> I think we're talking about two different things. You're talking > >> about > >> developing and I'm talking about legal issues. The manner of > >> developing was already discussed in OFBIZ-499. The only legal way to > >> use JIRA to collaborate this type of thing is to keep sending updated > >> patches to JIRA or to have a committer review and add it to a > >> specialized application. Neither one of these is speed of > >> development > >> friendly. > >> > >> Legal concerns wouldn't have been one of the primary driving > >> forces of > >> moving to the ASF if it were true that "we've done fine for years". > >> The project still has technical exposure to a C & D order as the CLA > >> only covered works the copyright holder gave directly to the ASF not > >> the works the copyright holder gave to the OFBIZ project prior to > >> incubation. IANAL, and I don't think there is significant exposure, > >> but it is still there. That opinion isn't based on the vehicle > >> used to > >> create Apache OFBiz, but on the impression of kindheartedness from > >> the > >> members of the community prior to incubation. > >> > >> I don't want to speculate on the legal relationship the group that > >> worked on the anon checkout had, but I would suspect that it > >> generated > >> some negative legal exposure as well and that the proposed setup of > >> Developers Conference will add to that. > >> > >> The only feedback that I've received from the general incubator list > >> are speculations, all with the caveat that the poster is not a lawyer > >> either and no one has been willing to post it to the legal-discuss > >> list. > >> > >> This issue is one of the MAJOR reasons for the existence of non- > >> profit > >> entities like the ASF, FSF, and SPI. So again, I ask you to > >> reconsider > >> the need of a more public sandbox where this kind of community > >> collaboration can be done without the complications of copyright > >> infringement, or at the very least pose the question to legal-discuss > >> for a formal opinion from those representing the ASF's interests. It > >> is my understanding that when it's added to Apache owned SVN, ASF is > >> the copyright holder of the collective work instead of an impromptu > >> partnership where the individuals have no legal authority to offer a > >> collective work. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Chris > >> --- "David E. Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> I REALLY don't think you need a sandbox for this. We've done fine > >>> for > >>> > >>> years without one, even with the recently re-done ecommerce > >>> anonymous > >>> > >>> checkout process and alternative checkout processes which were > >>> developed entirely outside of OFBiz. > >>> > >>> Getting this stuff done is mostly a matter of knowing what you're > >>> doing and having a clear goal to work towards, a design of sorts if > >>> you will. A sandbox won't help that. > >>> > >>> Once you have a design you can start building it without touching > >>> the > >>> > >>> current stuff, just make it an alternate path and don't break > >>> anything existing along the way. Once it is complete, then another > >>> patch can go in to remove the old code. > >>> > >>> It's that simple. That process has been followed well over a hundred > >>> > >>> times over the life of OFBiz and even for those with commit access > >>> it's the only way to go. If you don't have commit access, it's even > >>> better because you can develop until you're stuck or out of time, > >>> then throw in a patch and have it committed without breaking > >>> anything > >>> > >>> else, even if the new thing isn't working 100%. > >>> > >>> -David > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jan 25, 2007, at 12:05 PM, Chris Howe wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hey Anil, > >>>> > >>>> I've begun some of this already. I'm taking the approach of > >>> passing > >>>> the cart to a simple method that first checks the order type and > >>> then > >>>> calls a method or service that is focused on that order type. Each > >>>> order type service will call a multitude of methods/services that > >>>> prepare the cart data to be entered into the datasource. > >>>> > >>>> I would love to collaborate on this, but because of the size, it's > >>>> rather difficult to do by passing patches back and forth through > >>> JIRA > >>>> without having a reference point that SVN provides. This is one of > >>>> those things that the ofbiz-sandbox project would be good for, but > >>> it > >>>> still has a legal issue that will prevent it from being entered > >>> back > >>>> into the project. I can as an individual grant Apache the license > >>> it > >>>> needs for the work I do, you as an individual can grant Apache the > >>>> license it needs for the work you do, but without each of us > >>> assuming > >>>> the liability of a partnership we cannot grant a license for the > >>> work > >>>> as a whole. The only way around this is to use ofbiz-sandbox SVN > >>> and > >>>> make patches for each commit and each of us resubmit our own patch > >>> to > >>>> OFBiz JIRA with the order they need to be applied in. > >>>> > >>>> This would be sooooo much easier if the members of OFBiz PMC would > >>>> respond on including a public sandbox in Apache OFBiz as each SVN > >>>> commit will be licensed to Apache, and Apache will be the owner of > >>> the > >>>> work as a whole instead of an impromptu partnership being the > >>> owner. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --- Anil Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I planning to participate in this developer conference. I am > >>>>> interested in > >>>>> contributing towards making Order Entry process more flexible. If > >>>>> there are > >>>>> Others who will be interested we can start some ground work. I > >>>>> request one > >>>>> of the commiters who has interest in this to Please lead this > >>> effort. > >>>>> > >>>>> The anonymous checkout process in Ecommerce component provides > >>> some > >>>>> high > >>>>> level guiding principals. Few things that I can think of are > >>>>> 1) moving some code that's embedded in Java classes into small > >>> simple > >>>>> methods. > >>>>> 2) Moving process control logic from event handlers to Controller > >>>>> file. > >>>>> > >>>>> Any Ideas > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards > >>>>> Anil Patel > >>>>> > >>>>> On 1/16/07, David E. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> NOTE: I'm just sending this to the dev list as this event is > >>> meant > >>>>>> mainly for those who want to be involved with development of > >>> OFBiz > >>>>>> itself. There will be a variety of projects going on and we hope > >>>>>> everyone will be able to work on both paid and fun stuff, but the > >>>>>> results will all be going right back into OFBiz. Still, everyone > >>> is > >>>>>> welcome to attend and join the "party" so if you know of someone > >>>>> who > >>>>>> might be interested but isn't subscribed to the dev mailing list, > >>>>>> please forward it on to them. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> NOTE2: While most of this conference will be centered around > >>>>>> development, if you aren't a developer it doesn't mean you can't > >>>>>> come. It would be great to have, for example, people like > >>> business > >>>>>> analysts and technical writers to help with requirements, design, > >>>>> and > >>>>>> documentation and such would be great! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Included below is the original email about this, and most of the > >>>>>> information there is still applicable. Here are a few decisions, > >>>>>> based on feedback: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. the conference dates will be 5-9 March 2007 (Monday - Friday), > >>>>> and > >>>>>> may spill over into Sat the 10th > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2. you don't have to come for the entire conference, but we > >>>>> recommend > >>>>>> coming for at least Mon-Wed or Wed-Fri as we'll schedule > >>> big-group > >>>>>> meetings and any presentations for Wednesday; if you can come for > >>>>> the > >>>>>> whole week, please do, it'll be great! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 3. people are welcome to come and enjoy local attractions for the > >>>>>> weekend before and/or after (it will still be cool in the area > >>>>> here, > >>>>>> snowy in the mountains for skiing/boarding/snowmobiling, and > >>>>>> depending on weather it can be a great time for visiting the > >>>>> deserts > >>>>>> and canyons south of here) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 4. the cost to cover the meeting rooms, snacks, infra stuff, etc > >>>>> will > >>>>>> be $175 for the week (or $35/day) per person; we will have > >>> wireless > >>>>>> internet access, and I have a bridge if anyone needs wired > >>> access; > >>>>> we > >>>>>> will have at least 2 projectors and perhaps other large monitors > >>> to > >>>>>> facilitate group development and discussion > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 5. meals, lodging, etc are not included in the main price, but > >>>>> we'll > >>>>>> have 5-9 rooms available in the building (for $20-30 per night, > >>>>> first > >>>>>> come first serve); there is a decent hotel in town as well for > >>>>> around > >>>>>> $80 per night (contact me for details); for meals there are > >>> various > >>>>>> restaurants within walking distance > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 6. the attendance cap is initially 20 people; there seems to be a > >>>>> lot > >>>>>> of interest in this, so if we go over that we'll raise it by > >>>>> perhaps > >>>>>> 5-10 more people and convert some other adjacent rooms in the > >>>>>> building to be for group meeting use as well (we're planning on 2 > >>>>> big > >>>>>> rooms, plus a fairly big room with a small kitchen in it) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 7. the actual development goals are not finalized, but there is > >>>>> quite > >>>>>> a bit of interest in various things on the original list I > >>> included > >>>>>> (below), the big things seem to be testing infrastructure and > >>>>> project > >>>>>> management functionality > >>>>>> > >>>>>> To register (ASAP please, to make my job of planning easier!), > >>>>> please > >>>>>> contact me by email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) with the following > >>>>>> information: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. your name, company name, contact info (phone, email if > >>> different > >>>>>> than from address) > >>>>>> 2. how many in your group (if more than one, their names too) > >>>>>> 3. plans (as much as known) for how many days and which days > >>>>>> 4. lodging preference - in the building (private rooms, shared > >>>>>> toilets/showers) how many rooms, or nearby hotel (I'll respond > >>> with > >>>>>> contact info for the nice place close by, or there is a "fleabag" > >>>>>> motel place too though not sure if I'd recommend it) > >>>>>> 5. snack/diet preferences > >>>>>> 6. local travel plans: do you need a ride, or do you plan to > >>> rent/ > >>> > >> === message truncated === > >> > > -- > > Daniel > > > > *-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*- > > Have a GREAT Day! > > > > Daniel Kunkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > BioWaves, LLC http://www.BioWaves.com > > 14150 NE 20th St. Suite F1 > > Bellevue, WA 98007 > > 800-734-3588 425-895-0050 > > http://www.Apartment-Pets.com http://www.Illusion-Optical.com > > http://www.Card-Offer.com http://www.RackWine.com > > http://www.JokesBlonde.com http://www.Brain-Fun.com > > *-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*-.,,.-*"*- > > >
