On Mar 1, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 02:38:27PM -0800, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: >> John, I agree we need to merge in logical chunks sooner rather than later >> that allows for reviews and feedback sooner. >> >> Chip I can take the first stab at putting this in a wiki but would require >> collaboration with you and Alex to get it crisp and clear > > That would be quite nice of you Animesh! I just read it all and there does not seem to be a real conclusion especially from David's concerns. How do we move forward and ensure that the entire community and committers understand how code is developed in the ASF ? Is this thread a mandatory reading for instance ? -Sebastien > >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: John Burwell [mailto:jburw...@basho.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2013 2:18 PM >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: Summary of why where and how development happens >>> matters >>> >>> All, >>> >>> I would also like to add to a thought to the specific example given by >>> Alex. I >>> think we need to approach feature design and implementation in a manner >>> that does not produce 3 months of effort before it can merged into master. >>> Regardless of where work occurs, 3 months of work (and the associated >>> 1000s of lines of code) going unintegrated is a significant project risk. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -John >>> >>> On Feb 28, 2013, at 1:30 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <t...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 11:52:28AM +0530, David Nalley wrote: >>>>> On Feb 27, 2013 10:16 PM, "Prasanna Santhanam" <t...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:21:28AM +0530, Chip Childers wrote: >>>>>>> The TL;DR version: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The issue that we ran into with several features being developed >>>>>>> "outside the community" for 4.1 was a major deal, and it had >>>>>>> several implications. First, doing that effectively hurts our >>>>>>> community. The other issue is related to the legal right of the >>>>>>> project to accept the code developed elsewhere. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ok - I read *all* of it and still have a lingering question: >>>>>> >>>>>> What happens to code/docs etc that is released by a commercial >>>>>> entity re-branding ACS with the ASF license before it is released as >>>>>> an official ACS release? Said code was developed per the community >>>>>> guidelines but just was released before the ACS code was released. >>>>>> Is that okay? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Prasanna., >>>>> >>>>> That is okay. >>>>> We don't care what people do with ACS code. We care that code that >>>>> comes into ACS is developed here. >>>> >>>> Thanks David - everything looks good otherwise. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Prasanna., >> >>
