Hey Bill, Without speaking for Kevin, I think that is very good feedback. As to your points with my interpretation.
Kevin is speaking on behalf of JanRain which is the company that has done the majority of OpenID implementations to-date. What I see him expressing is their commitment to moving their development to the Heraldry SVN and integrating into the ASF environment. Part of this problem is that when JanRain did their initial code donation, development didn't move at that point. Maybe what makes more sense is removing the code they contributed a few months ago and starting fresh with them tar'ing up their repository they want to contribute and have it voted in on the heraldry-dev list? Activity level issues aside, we need to figure out how to get this code in so that we as the Heraldry community can resolve the concerns around activity and methodology. --David -----Original Message----- From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:18 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Cc: heraldry-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Board response to January Report on Heraldry Recordon, David wrote: > Hi all, > As Ted mentioned there was a thread started yesterday by Kevin Turner > ( > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-heraldry-dev/200701 > .m > box/[EMAIL PROTECTED]) about how JanRain really > is now committed to moving all of their work into the Heraldry project. > As to not reproduce everything he said here, I really would encourage > everyone to go read that message. No disrespect, David; that's the message that inspired my reaction. A couple of small points... "This time, I think the results were decisive." 1. We - Heraldry Project? Your Company? US vs THEM - bad signal. (I'm not saying you won't have internal dialogs. Presented this way continues to highlight the divisions.) "We are going to abandon darcs and use svn for all Heraldry projects." 2. I was not clear this is ASF svn. However, there are some patches left in our write queue that we need to flush. 3. US vs THEM again - and "our" queue. I'm as happy to "flush" any project who believes code deserves to be "flushed" at the ASF. "So later this week you'll see a burst of roughly sixty patches from me in libraries/python/openid/trunk, and some more from Jonathan in libraries/php." 4. You present these as decided. Politically correct "I have about NN patches to offer back in lib.../trunk and Jonathan has about NN patches to commit to libraries/php that are lingering in our vendor branch. They do ..." "After that, commits should come in at more regular intervals in more manageable quantities." 5. Presented as decided. You aren't in a position to say that w.r.t. other committers. "I'll try to space out my commit activity after that so it's easier to follow, and will give my commits an extra couple of weeks for comments." Again - it's how you chose to phrase things. >> There are some other things we'll need to update too -- e.g. our >> buildbot is currently triggered by the darcs apply hook. first comment I had no issues with. Your box, your toys, in most projects either individuals or companies have resources to offer. May I point you to the CIA notifications that svn is willing to generate? http://cia.navi.cx/ They are sent automatically by our svn - configured by [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the purpose of providing instant notices on projects' irc.freenode.net channels, but I'm sure it's trivial for you to use these messages directly. Ask on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
