On 8/26/14 4:34 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >> Agreed, TDF might attract a new pool of developers. We are just >> disagreeing on what the best way of attracting them is. I think trying >>to >> attracting them by asking them to do manual testing is not as attractive >> as asking them to provide TDF fixes. > >1. So manually testing is: >- compiling the release candidates >- running it >- if you find an issue report it in JIRA > >2. Fixing is: >- Setting up git and getting our repo >- compiling the code >- running it >- finding an issue >- Tying to find out what causes the issue >- Recompile and change code a few times until issue is fixed or give up >as you can't fix it >- Creating a patch file >- Reporting it in JIRA > >Which sounds harder? If someone does 1, other people with different >skills get to see and hopefully help up. If we insist on 2, then only >people who mange to fix stuff will report it. That's not a valid argument. Folks don't need the repo to offer a patch for TDF. All of the source is right there! Anyway, at this point I think I have made my case. It is compliant with Apache policy. We are currently applying a different set of rules for Badge Installer, but that should probably be a different thread. Time to agree to disagree. Unless I get some support from others, we'll be doing it the way you want. -Alex
