Hi Peter, I totally understand what you're trying to say and I have doubts myself about the confusion that might arise not so much regarding ownership, which is less important in such a project, but more regarding whether that particular branch is open for contribution or if the author would prefer to do his developments in isolation.
In order to keep things simple, I'd say to keep the username folder strategy for now and see how things progress. Yet another approach that is kind of middle ground would be to not separate by username, but to include the author's username in the branch name alongside with the feature of the branch (I think it was Omar who suggested this). The main advantage of this approach would be that it brings the feature name to the root of the whiteboard (I don't have to go into each user's folder to see what is being worked on). Best, Rui -------- Original Message -------- > From: "Peter Elst" <peter.e...@gmail.com> > Sent: segunda-feira, 9 de Janeiro de 2012 22:46 > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: whiteboard > > > I don't think I have to say that I would never go into something and > > delete stuff without talking to the contributor. > > > > my mistake, sorry Mike - so in general lets say somebody wants to work on > something in the whiteboard, would you create your own copy of it or put it > in the original folder? > > I'm just asking because with the username in the folder, the situation > could arise that the code was originally put in the whiteboard by own > committer but 99% of the code got contributed by somebody else. > > Guessing that is not an issue but might create some confusion. > > - Peter
