On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 14:31, Erich Titl wrote:
> At 22:42 27.11.2002, Mike Noyes wrote:
> >On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 12:50, Erich Titl wrote:
> > > With the
> > > consent of the lead developers of each branch it should be possible to
> > > build a tree which does not necessarily have to be maintained by the lead
> > > developer.
> >
> >I don't think so. By definition a lead developer is in charge of the
> >release/branch purpose and direction. Aren't both lost when abdicating
> >source tree control? I believe a release/branch source tree in our
> >repository not endorsed by it's lead developer would be a new
> >release/branch?
>
> The important word IMHO is _endorsed_. What is the canonical way for this
> endorsement? I doubt Linus Thorvalds still manages his own kernel CVS tree.
Erich,
In my opinion endorsed means the developer uses the tree to generate
releases. Or, in the case of bering-uclibc K.P. approached Jacques and
asked permission to use the bering name for a uclibc based tree.
> > > Maybe we could invite the lead developers of the various branches to
> > > mirror their respective cvs tree(s) to a public place where it is
> > > possible for the other developers to make branches/modifications which
> > > eventually would be either rejected or make it to the base. Of course
> > > this might change the development cycle a little.
> >
> >I'd like to avoid numerous cvs branch creations in our repository.
> >Merging multiple cvs branches is a significant challenge.
To ensure we're talking about the same things, I have these two
definitions:
cvs branch == a cvs function
5. Branching and merging
http://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs_5.html#SEC54
release/branch == LEAF project release/branch (e.g. Bering,
Dachstein, Oxygen, WISP-Dist, PacketFilter, Lince).
> This is true and that is why I personally favour an open tree. CVS is a
> wonderful tool for distributed development. Unfortunately this tool is IMHO
> not used to its full potential in the LEAF community (which you pointed out
> in the mail which triggered this thread).
I agree wholeheartedly.
> For example in my little CVS tree
> I am the only one doing anything. If someone spots an error in something I
> did, he can easily get the code, modify it, and make a _redundant_ copy in
> his own CVS tree. Reporting this back to me is a compulsory thing. I might
> not spot the same error for a long time, continuing on my erroneous way
> and someone else might later on find the same error again at nauseam. If I
> understand CVS correctly that is not the way it was meant to be. CVS allows
> concurrency and conflicts.
Correct. (see note at bottom of post)
> What is done with the various branches of a tree
> is something which can be dealt with at release time (by of course the lead
> developers or someone charged with the release task)
I'm not quite grasping your meaning here. Please elaborate.
> It is even less if someone just adds a little (hopefully not harmful)
> extension to a part of the software. Unless this extension makes its way to
> the base distribution it remains in its niche at the developers private
> tree.
Correct. It is up to the release/branch lead developer and team members
to incorporate these extensions/patches. I expect people that repeatedly
provide useful additions would be asked to join the team.
> For example if I look at the ulibc Bering distribution they
> certainlly keep parts of Bering as it is, as Jaqcues and Erik kept parts of
> Dachstein. Some improvement made in a new branch may not find its way back
> to its predecessor because they are living in different trees in the same
> forest. Alike development in the main branch requires merging with a
> foreign CVS tree to make its way to the new branches. This IMHO leads to
> redundancy.
Are you talking about LEAF releases/branches or cvs branches? Also note:
not all of our releases/branches derive from the same root.
> But all this is at of course the discretion of the lead developers.
>
> OK, I hope I have not insulted anybody.
Not in the least. I find this type of discussion stimulating. :-)
> Folks, please use my CVS, and fix my bugs on the way ;-)
I second that.
Note: it is possible with our cvs_acls script to give write access to
certain sections of your personal tree to other project members.
--
Mike Noyes <mhnoyes at users.sourceforge.net>
http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/
http://leaf-project.org/ http://sitedocs.sf.net/ http://ffl.sf.net/
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T
handheld. Power & Color in a compact size!
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en
_______________________________________________
leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
