On May 1, 2009, at 10:19 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Anil Patel <anil.pa...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
This is one of the big reasons what I love and hate
community driven software. I don't see how what Andrew
did is bad. Even though it was personal communication but I
know Andrew only started after Adrian and Jacques showed
interest by commenting on the page.
The only interest I showed was that I agreed that OFBiz security
could use improvement, and I suggested he use a third party library.
I did not endorse or approve of his design.
Since then more energy has been spend in trying to get answer for "Why
you did not ask us first" then really understand the proposal and do
constructive feedback.
Andrew has been actively explaining his idea all this time.
As I demonstrated in another reply, no he did not. Only a few days
went by between introducing the idea and committing code.
What's wrong with that, as long as he did not disappear after
committing the code.
The work done till date is not blocking anybody, old
security system is still in place. New system is implemented
in example component so its lot easy for him to explain and
people to understand.
What if the new work is a bad design? How will we know that until
everyone has had time to evaluate it?
Implementation in example component demonstrates that he is prepared
to demonstrate new system and let people test and ask questions. If
few things are not implemented yet then either help with them or just
ask. Instead of asking to restart, its better if you ask for more
complex examples that prove abilities of new system. Help evaluate
instead of resisting.
People have different ways of working in community, Joe is
committer still all the time he creates Jira issue and
uploads his patch and most of time its somebody else who
does commits, but that's his way of working. If we
don't do what Joe does then why should Andrew do what
Adrian does.
As far as I know, Joe submits patches for things he doesn't have
commit rights to.
Not always that case.
I don't see any reason why we should start over.
Do you see a reason why we shouldn't? Will the project suffer
immensely if we pause and wait for others to comment? Is there some
catastrophe looming that requires us to rush this through?
Project will not suffer immensely, at the same time its not suffering
because code is committed to trunk. I can ask same thing to others,
new system is not hurting anybody, we can still use old system.
All
the time we talk about making things easy so people will
contribute, Why do you want to resist a seasoned contributer
for working. I'll rather have expect community will
support. All the time he has been asking people to tell him
suggestions, wish list etc. Why not support him and get more
out of him instead.
If we can't invite the community to participate - as I suggested -
then that only proves what I suspect - that this is a design that is
being foisted on the community.
There is no motivation for Andrew to do any such thing. Its always our
policy to contribute maximum possible (unless clients have objections)
to the community. I am really surprised and its really unfortunate
that you think like this.
-Adrian
