Jonathan Revusky wrote:
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...)
Even if it suddenly happened that I were to be suddenly granted commit
access it would not make sense for me to use this. If there were real
demand from a significant body of the Struts developers and a structured
mechanism for taking in the code, then that would be very different.
Thinking that this could ever happen now is a pipe dream, because it
already happening with an altogether different framework - i.e. WebWork.
With two major divergent strands of development now going on under a
single umbrella, the space is already crowded and confusing enough.
No, I think it from now on it will probably make more sense to keep any
major Struts 1.1 development initiatives completely separate from the
main project. It shouldn't be that way, but it is.
Phil Zoio (Strecks - http://strecks.sourceforge.net/)
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
