On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 10:36:23 -0500 Michael Jennings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> On Thursday, 03 November 2005, at 02:11:12 (+1300), > Dale Anderson wrote: > > > Just a quick note to advise the e_modules directory has been removed > > from cvs. > > It has not been removed, and it will not be unless and until such a > decision is made after discussion on this mailing list amongst the > developers. > > > This was due to concern regarding the increasing number of modules > > being commited, and the likely hood these would be left unmaintained > > This is just silly. Do you have any idea how many packages we have in > CVS that haven't been touched in ages? So what? > > > These are now all updated and available from get-e.org (thanks devilhorns) . > > They should not need to be downloaded from get-e.org or anywhere else. > > > Module authors can now contact the get-e team for access to the site > > to maintain their code and provide updates. > > Ridiculous. It should be up to the module authors whether or not they > want to develop in our CVS tree or elsewhere, and whether or not they > have abandoned their work or will continue maintaining it. > > Not once did anyone ask the module authors on this list how they > wanted to handle this situation. This was a unilateral decision > driven primarily by Hisham, though he apparently got raster's buy-in, > and discussed only between the two of them while most of us were > asleep. > > Does anyone else see a problem here? These kinds of decisions being > made "behind closed doors" is not how an Open Source project should > be. Nor should people's work be removed from CVS without their input > and consent. > > This list is here for purposes of discussion. So people need to stop > acting like such significant decisions can and should be made on IRC > and start COMMUNICATING. > > To that end, I would suggest splitting up the individual modules so > that each one builds and installs independently of the others. It's > not hard to do; I did it for tclock and calendar already. So why not > split the others up and let each module author control his own module > rather than feeling like it's just part of a bigger pie? first - check cvs. the coded hasnt been removed. it's there. lurking. the problem is - a lot of these moduels have problems - lots of them. the problems grow as basically the authors dont' maintain them. i have module changes in the pipeline that will mean yet more changes needed and given the history peolpe other than the authors will fix them to build - but they will still be badly done modules and grow worse as their code origins divert from main development (welcome to developemnt in cvs where apis are not fixed in stone!). the aim is to stop the tirade of "why doesnt this work" about these modules in cvs. the problem is that they need to be encouraged to be maintained per author separately from cvs.the code is there for posterity. this was discussed openly on #edevelop. as for the authors - the proff is that they dont get maintained - i see no reason to ask nicely about code put in cvs then left up to others to fix - when they may or may not have time. all the "my monitor module reports 200% cpu" and not a single (correct) fix. anyway - the long term thing is that we cant go give a cvs account to every module writer who wants to make one to go put it in an ever expanding e_modules tree only to commit it then vanish and leave it up to others to maintain. they should maintain it themselevs on their own systems and upload tarballs to their own web pages if they want to release. get-e is providing a place for those without web space or without enough bandwidth. this is a first step to DISCOURAGE use of the e_modules tree BEFORE its completely disabled for building and survives only as a dead code repository. you are making a mountain out of a molehill here. no code has been deleted. it hasnt actually even been disabled. this has split the modules into their own build trees and moved such development of "3rd party toys" out of cvs. the moduels might be useful to many people - or fun, but where they are now, and how they build and are done, is not a good "example" to set. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 裸好多 Tokyo, Japan (東京 日本) ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
