On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Andreas Hocevar <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 25, 2010, at 00:34 , David Winslow wrote: > >> On 06/24/2010 04:43 PM, Sebastian Benthall wrote: >>> Thanks for stepping up on this! >>> >>> To make this happen, I'd ask everyone with a task that requires JavaScript >>> coding to check in with me. By doing so, it should be much easier to avoid >>> duplicate efforts and share resources. >>> >>> David and I have been talking a lot about team process and how we can make >>> DVCS work for us. >>> >>> One topic that came up was the idea of having topical repositories which >>> are maintained by domain experts. So, for example, Andreas could maintain >>> the GeoNode repository or branch that all major JS changes had to go >>> through. Then we would pull from that repo/branch to the development or >>> release branches. > > This would be a workflow without a strict develop - review - commit cycle. So > people could commit to a domain branch, and the domain expert would have to > permanently review it? I think I like a ticket and review based approach > better, but this might add too much overhead. Maybe we find something in > between, e.g. accompany commits to this branch with (trac) tickets and ticket > comments that have the domain expert on cc? Other ideas?
Andreas, I think your concern can be addressed by the use of "pull requests", github interface allows it, but they can also be done via more traditional methods (email, irc). What I have in mind, is for example the following: "Ariel has a nice idea about how to improve the javascript generation based on Django templates, he pushes those commits to his `js-updates` branch": `http://github.com/ingenieroariel/geonode (branch js-updates)` and (depending on what is decided here): a. Uses the github interface to send a pull request to ``achocevar`` or ``geonode`` to check out his changes. b. Creates a ticket with the proposal and link to the branch. c. Sends an email to the mailing list about the change / proposal. (Like dwins did for the template refactor) and then: "Andreas reads the commit on github interface, gets a feel on what the code changes are about and pulls the changes to his local repo, merges them in the `js` branch and pushes them back to http://github.com/geonode/geonode (branch js) or (branch develop)." To summarize, I think it should be a "pull" based system instead of people constantly "push"ing commits to domain branches making core developers' life harder. Ariel
