On 8/6/12 4:21 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I'm not sure I think projects/experimental should exist in trunk. We've
>> never really finished the discussion but this seems like something that
>> should go in branches/unstable.
>
> Branches/unstable would be good making changing to existing
> components/architecture. Projects/experimental is good to get new components
> (that are not 100% ie missing docs, not fully tested etc but functional) into
> the framework for users of the SDK to use (at their own risk) is how I saw it.
> Also give a place were committers can look at things that need a little polish
> (and thus easier to find something to contribute). Also means we're more
> likely to get feedback on new components by users of the SDK. Give user of the
> SDK an better idea of what is being working on and what may be coming into the
> main namespaces soon (dare I mention the word roadmap?). Easier to show that
> progress is being made (and users of the SDK are unlikely to look an anything
> but the releases). Also means components can be added here without endless
> discussion on what namespace they should go it :-) Well that's how I see it
> anyway.
>
> It been brought up several time on the list and generally though of as a good
> idea (or so I thought). There a few existing components that could be placed
> here straight away.
>
>> I think I agree with what some of the other Apache projects document -
>> anything in trunk should be releasable
>> with a couple of days because in theory anyone can decide to cut a release
>> at any point in time.
> And the experimental project should also abide by that.
>
> What do other people think? It easy enough to remove if it's generally thought
> of as a bad idea.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
Imagine if we really get going and have lots of new stuff coming in. I
can't see how we could keep trunk stable enough. Plus, I'm not sure how
many non-committers are going to pull from trunk; I think they would use
official releases. And I'm not sure if they'd spend much time with stuff
labelled experimental.
I still like the 3-tier approach. Really experimental stuff goes in the
whiteboard. Your job is then to make noise to get folks to try it out,
maybe by threatening to promote it to the unstable branch. We would ask the
committers and other interested folks to generally work out of the unstable
branch. That would be where I would be fixing bugs and adding simple new
features and where I would be syncing to SVN most often. I probably
wouldn't spend time syncing trunk until some release manager says they want
to cut a release. Then we'd check in a series of changes that went into
unstable into trunk, do some testing, and cut the release from trunk.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
