On 8/20/12 11:34 AM, "Om" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> What would be the steps to integrate a proposed change if we didn't use
>> GitHub and we retired the GitHub mirror?
>>
>
> I am sorry, but why would we want to retire the GitHub mirror? Right now,
> it is read-only. If we leave it like that, the community can at least fork
> the projects and work on it.
>
Why couldn't the community make forks/branches from the official Apache Flex
Git repo? It would save a step, prevent issues from mirror delays, reduce
bandwidth on Apache infra. Would we have to make mirror requests of Infra
for every branch in GBM? That would also be painful.
>
>>
>> GitHub might be great for sharing, if the committers have lots of extra
>> steps to deal that will be a dis-incentive for reviewing patches.
>>
>
> Agreed. We will have to come up with a way and put pressure on infra (ha!)
> to use such a workflow.
>
> From my side, I am HIGHLY interested in removing the barriers for community
> participation. Getting an acceptable GitHub workflow is something I will
> be working on soon (after I wrap up what I am doing right now)
>
I am also interested in getting the community involved, but not at the
sacrifice of the Apache Way. As the mentors have warned, we need to make
sure folks have legally and willingly contributed changes and that only the
committers can make those changes. We have to make the workflow safe and
efficient for the committers as well. It will likely require some
balancing.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
