james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <a...@superlinksoftware.com>
Subject Re: IMAP - New CVS Repository
Date Sat, 24 Aug 2002 11:10:44 GMT
On Sat, 24 Aug 2002 08:27:22 -0400, Stephan Schiessling wrote:

> Danny Angus wrote:
>> Sascha,
>> Its up to you of course, but I'm not sure that forking the code would
>> be a good idea.
> Yes, a code fork is a bad idea, but this is not a code fork. The
> separate CVS repository was my idea and I still think it is a good idea.
> The code, which goes into official IMAP repository must be reviewed by a
> commiter and it has to be stable. I generally support this model,
> because it has advantages, but it blocks the current development for

As you contribute you build up a trust relationship and eventually you'll
become a committer.  "Gee quality control and meritocracy slows us down,
lets ditch them" sounds like "corportate logic" to me.

> For development and testing IMAP code, it is important to have the
> latest code. For that, we can use a separate CVS repository for IMAP,
> which provides latest even completely unstable IMAP code. If there is
> again a somehow stable code, it will be commited to official CVS
> repository in the usual way. This way commiters are not bothered to
> much, the "stable code requirement" is fulfilled and development for
> latest code is guaranteed. Therefore I think it is a good idea.

I totally disagree.

> I convinced Sascha Kulawik, to use this new (still not existing)
> repository, and I will use it too. Is there anybody else, who wants to
> use it, and is there anybody who does not want to use it ?

I'll continue contributing patches to JAMES rather than the fork.

> I consider the currently unstable IMAP code as biggest disadvantage of
> James. We must fix this as soon as possible, and I think the IMAP code
> should move from proposals into main trunk as soon as possible.

I agree, which is why you should be more patient, continue to contribute,
build up karma and eventually you'll be a committer.  It generally
doesn't take long if you submit enough (quality) patches become a general
irritant (please commit patch X its been 2 days) but a respected one, 
you'll be proposed a committer in no time.  

-Andy (who is perfectly fine submitting patches)

> Stephan Schiessling
>> And if you wanted to be a commiter to James you would have to have
>> contributed something first, submit your changes to IMAP, let everyone
>> judge them, if they take IMAP forward perhaps someone will propose you.
>> If not *then* you can fork the code.
>> d.
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>From: 	Sascha Kulawik [mailto:sascha@kulawik.de] Sent:	23 August 2002
>>>To:	james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
>>>Subject:	IMAP - New CVS Repository
>>>because of that I'm not a commiter of James, Stephan Schiessling and me
>>>want to set up a CVS Repository only for the IMAP tree of james. Thats
>>>needed because there will be more developers for IMAP (as seen today),
>>>and we want to organize our code (to get it working 4 james :) Sorry, I
>>>had to work for my  examination so I had not enough time for working on
>>>the buglist (but tomorrow ist over :)
>>>We will inform the List about the address of the repository, regards,
>>> << File: ATT00083.txt >>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org> For additional
>> commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message