Joseph Kowalski wrote:
> John Plocher wrote:
>> "codifies the ... design pattern that it used".
> I'm at an absolute loss as to how you expect us to approve something we
> haven't
> seen. Do you regularly hand out blank checks?
> But its not just wordsmithing into a best practice. Its defining a yet
> undefined policy.
I think we are talking at cross purposes, and are in fact in violent
agreement.
I believe that we both believe that:
This set of cases is explicitly setting precedent WRT how
to install FOSS components that require the ability to have
multiple co-installed versions.
/This/ discussion is happening under the php5 topic, but is
applicable to the larger SAMPP proposal and all of its
sub-components.
Future FOSS-derived cases will also have this multi-version
install requirement, and so require that this precedent be
well articulated and reusable.
As part of this review, the details of such a co-install
policy will be hammered out.
The point of my previous messages was simply that
Given that the policy (whatever it is) will be set by this
review, the action item to write up that policy and publish it
as a best practice can safely be decoupled from the tasks
the project team needs to do /this week/.
-John
