james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Danny Angus <Danny_An...@slc.co.uk>
Subject Re: Out of the box / zero config / MultiDomain configuration Proposal
Date Fri, 02 Sep 2005 10:39:41 GMT


> I'm going to dislike the "review then commit" style for James because it
> seems to me that currently no-one has time to actually review and discuss
> proposals.

Actually we have "commit then review" but it isn't a free for all we need
to have consensus about what changes we are going to make.

I don't have *technical* issues about your proposal, but I do think that it
is important that you clearly describe the new feature which you are
proposing to develop.

Lets be clear about this, this would be a new feature, not a change or
enhancement to an existing feature, I therfore believe that it is right
that we agree upon the behaviour of the feature before it is implemented,
and review the implementation after it has been commited.

This is what happened with fast-fail, and by and large that has been a
sucess.

> As an example, I asked wether we should remove mm-mysql (with my
> motivation), include derby or not, remove file repositories in favour of
> derby or not, but I've received no replies...

I thought that someone had opposed the removal of file repositories.
They are a useful tool for compatibility and interoperability with other
software which can read certain file types.
File repositories are also faster in small volume installations.
I think you should probably make this one a vote.

removing mm-mysql and including derby support I think have lazy consensus,
bundling derby.. I can see two sides to that question but have no opinion
myself.

> What is the correct burocracy
> for this issues? Should I start an official vote for every question I
asked
> in past?
No, lazy consensus is fine, but don't make too many proposals at one time!

> Should I consider the silence a lazy-consensus?
Yes.

> Should I think that
> most commiters are on holiday and it's better to wait?

No, but it is polite to wait 72 hours to allow everyone to have a chance to
read proposals.

d.




***************************************************************************
The information in this e-mail is confidential and for use by the addressee(s) only. If you
are not the intended recipient (or responsible for delivery of the message to the intended
recipient) please notify us immediately on 0141 306 2050 and delete the message from your
computer. You may not copy or forward it or use or disclose its contents to any other person.
As Internet communications are capable of data corruption Student Loans Company Limited does
not accept any  responsibility for changes made to this message after it was sent. For this
reason it may be inappropriate to rely on advice or opinions contained in an e-mail without
obtaining written confirmation of it. Neither Student Loans Company Limited or the sender
accepts any liability or responsibility for viruses as it is your responsibility to scan attachments
(if any). Opinions and views expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender and may not
reflect the opinions and views of The Student Loans Company Limit
 ed.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer
viruses.

**************************************************************************

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message