David,
> "We" do not now, nor have we ever, turned away a contribution
because it
> was complex.
Very well, I'll just use the word "you" then. I take it that you do
not turn away contributions
because they were complex.
The question from me would be whether you do or do not turn away,
knowingly or not, contributions
that are valid but too complex for review. It's not rhetorical, but
you're free to do your own
sanity/verification checks on that supposed phenomenon and deem it
rhetorical or invalid.
> Could you do us all a big favor Jonathon? Your comments seem to be
> fairly consistent along these lines. I think what would be helpful
to
> you, and to anyone reading and agreeing with your comments, is to
step
> back and try to explain why things are the way they are. Feel free
to
> share that with the group for a sanity check if you'd like.
I'm not so sure of the "why" of things, but am only more certain of
the "what" of things. Things
are the way they are, no matter how we interpret the "why".
So, for now, I continue to merge in (to my own SVN) several
contributions that are deemed too
difficult to review/merge by the committers. I continue to keep such
enhancements in step with
updates from OFBiz trunk. And I continue in my failure(?) to feed
such "compatibilized/merged"
enhancements back to OFBiz trunk even though they really are the same
license.
And the phenomenon of several of us (incompatible contributors?)
holding on to our own
enhancements will continue. Some of us may not know how to keep in
step with OFBiz trunk updates;
others may. Those of us who can keep in step will continue to benefit
from OFBiz progress, but be
unable to feed the benefit back to OFBiz. There will still be
enhancements out there that are kept
away/apart from OFBiz. That's the way of things? Or maybe not?
I stand corrected. I think I am "helping" OFBiz in the wrong way.
I'll stop that. :) Thanks for
reminding me.
I was waiting to dump the loads of my enhancements into your trunk,
but I think I should take a
sanity check for now. Anyway, there needs to be at least one
stabilizing branch (save point, so to
speak) before we can go full steam with the trunk. And there's still
no such branch yet.
Jonathon
David E. Jones wrote:
On Apr 20, 2007, at 9:04 PM, Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
We shouldn't turn away complex contributions anymore.
"We" do not now, nor have we ever, turned away a contribution
because it
was complex.
I myself have loads of enhancements (mostly to widget module) that
I
feel uneasy about releasing to the community, simply because of
this
odd use of trunk: it's used like a slow-moving release branch that
is
unable to handle introductions of radical enhancements.
Yet, this somewhat slow-moving trunk isn't still enough and
focused
enough on achieving release-quality stability. It's the worst of
both
worlds: it's not rapid enough to allow for radical progress, and
not
calm and focused-on-cleaning-up enough to produce a stable release
for
non-OFBiz developers.
Could you do us all a big favor Jonathon? Your comments seem to be
fairly consistent along these lines. I think what would be helpful
to
you, and to anyone reading and agreeing with your comments, is to
step
back and try to explain why things are the way they are. Feel free
to
share that with the group for a sanity check if you'd like.
-David
