Dave Newton wrote:
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
Well, there [are] all these issues, and yeah, I guess they could make
you and other people shudder.
If it _didn't_ make somebody shudder I'd seriously question their
overall programming knowledge... at some point you have to start over.
Well, that's one assessment. OTOH, it is problematic to think that if
somebody disagrees with you on this or something else that it calls into
question their professional competence.
Again, I think my point stands: if there is no desire on the part of
existing Struts committers to do anything with the Struts 1.x codebase,
then there is really nothing to lose by letting other people who want to
develop that come in and do something.
But the real key point I am wondering about is this: if the existing
Struts developers have no plans for developing the Struts 1.x
codebase, what is the justification for not letting people who want to
work on that (independently of whether this reflects good taste on
their part or not) come in and work on it?
Given the basic parameters of the situation, what would there possibly
be to lose?
We've already gone over this, we disagree about who should have commit
rights.
<shrug>
If you say so... I am not quite sure what the basis of our disagreement
on that was. And I have to point out that, okay, you can disagree with
me, but it's hardly a symmetrical thing. I have actual experience
running open source projects. You apparently do not.
But anyway, to focus on the question of our disagreement on this, let's
take a specific case in point. I am not acquainted personally with Phil
Zoio, the author of Strecks. It's not like I have some agenda of
"championing his cause" or something like that; it's just a case in
point to focus discussion. Now, it seems self-evident that this is a guy
who is able and willing to do some quality work. Now, my view of things
is that there is really no legitimate reason not to immediately make
somebody like that a committer on the Struts project, if he wanted to do
work on 1.x. (Again, if he or others want to do something with it and
the existing committers don't...)
Do you disagree with my view on this? If you do, what is the basis for
your disagreement?
There is still maintenance work being done on 1.x, sometimes
more than that.
That's an orthogonal issue. Even within 1.x, you can have a stable 1.3.x
branch in which at most nth order bug fixes happen and a 1.4.x branch
which is aggressively developed.
Jonathan Revusky
--
lead developer, FreeMarker project, http://freemarker.org/
Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
