Remy Maucherat wrote: > > Development in "trunk" is not done properly at the moment.
Back up 1 step; define "proper", with pointers to the http://tomcat.apache.org/dev/ documents, if they exist. Otherwise you are doing a good job of showing the entire vote is really nothing but ad hominem attacks between a few developers, and has much less to do with code than personalities. > There's a large thread on these issues. At the time, the API design was > downright bad. It did improve to some extent (without further debate), > but this was all done in trunk without any collaboration. You just said you improved it; ergo you collaborated. You don't need dev@ mails to discuss commits until someone disagrees, just as you did. Your veto in that example said "leave it on trunk". If you now disagree that it can be improved to satisfy your original veto, restate your technical veto and just ask for the revisions to be reverted. It's project history, even if it was a failed attempt at concensus. So it belongs on svn trunk, if only in the attic. Of course all code is written without collaboration, unless you are all trying to reach a consensus character-by-character on how the source code is created. How it's integrated, or if it is at all, is a matter for the project to determine together. > I wish to move out the current trunk and use stricter commit policies to > avoid these sort of issues, and force agreement before commit. > > Rémy So you are saying trunk was used according to the project policy and you would now like to change the commit policy for trunk? That's fine, but comments that people are abusing trunk doesn't jive with what you just said that you want to change policy. Beyond withdrawing the silly vote, asking for the code you veto to be removed, and moving forward, don't you think you should hold a vote to make trunk R-T-C first? I've actually glanced through the various earlier messages and really see only two points of view expressed on the list about any of the actual code. Yours, and Filips. Which leads me to read the whole debate as a turf war over Tomcat. I can't believe this project would already be at the melt-down point again, but here we are. It's not your personal playground, nor is it Filip's personal playground. Feel free to contradict my opinion with a pointer or two at some technical input from other project members, of course. But I become concerned when only two people in a project even grok the technical implications of what is in their repository. Some backstory, As a frame of reference, the same thing happened at APR/HTTPD over the entire concept of buckets and brigades. Ryan and Greg were at odds over the implications. As svn was properly managed with commits/vetos/reverts, the projects were at an impasse with no movement to the next generation server. So, all the committers were invited to a f2f powwow for Greg and Ryan to duke it out and thoroughly explain their plan and justification. We treated it as a non-vetoable situation. Neither design was technically invalid, it was a preference. So they had their shootout, and (gasp) even came to agreement on the appropriate solution (to the nods of dozens of attendees). More importantly, the other committers who were 'inflicted' with the design had a chance to thoroughly understand what it was and why it was done that way. Back to Tomcat, it sounds like this is an argument of preference over technical correctness. Perhaps November in Atlanta or Hong Kong would be a good time for you to sit down, fill in all the other interested committers in the exact merits of your preferences, and reach consensus? And maybe feathercast the debate highlights and decision :) Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
