On 2/1/08, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > However, dropping parts of the code feels counterproductive to me, as I > think it might put up a perceived barrier to collaboration with the > Thrift project.
As long as you remember that you can't release or graduate without properly audited code with a paper trail to the original author of the code. We wouldn't want developers to feel like their changes to Thrift won't be accepted without an up front investment of time building reputation > in the Thrift community. You need a paper trail, and you need people to maintain said code. Dropping code into a project is not the same as "creating a community", which is what Apache is about. Dropping code is something one can do very well at google code, or sourceforge. When you accept a code drop without getting the developer to maintain it, does it really help your community? Are the current active developers going to maintain a code base in a language that is not familiar to them? Also note that in order for the ASF to provide legal protection to the contributors, the code needs to be sound. I think reverting and reapplying these changes creates another risk. > Developers would have incentive to keep some language-specific changes > to themselves and not share them, simply because it would be more > efficient, not because they are philosophically opposed to open source > or sharing their changes at all. I don't understand what you are trying to say here. How does including the code a priori make it any different? When they want to contribute changes, they still need to go through proper channels: provide an ICLA, code grant or patch through JIRA/bugzilla with the proper annotation. > And to be quite frank, it feels very counterproductive to me to remove > code from the project with full a priori intention of putting it back > in. Are you sure you will get the appropriate ICLA's from all the authors that have contributed to the whole code base? We'd rather focus on keeping development open and moving forwards. > Removing people's code from the project could send an insulting and > negative message. You will not be able to graduate or release if not all code is accounted for. That is just the way it works. Either get the appropriate documentation (ICLA, code grant) from the contributors, strip the offending code or rewrite the offending code (ensuring the proper licensing). I am not sure how not including a code base without a proper licensing history would be considered insulting though. Martijn
