On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:>
> > 1. Make a patch of ApacheFlexContributorA codebase and attach it to a > JIRA > > ticket. In the JIRA ticket the CLA of only Contributor A is sufficient. > Has Apache ruled that this is the case? > That is what I got from the various JIRA tickets I have been reading. I sent links for those a couple of emails ago. We need to add this to the list of questions we need answered from INFRA. > > > As you can see in approach 2, the community i.e. non-committers are not > able to collaborate freely on development. And it serializes the workflow > when it does not necessarily have to. > I don't think that was a fair comparison. I don't think there is anything > about Git that makes it more apparent you should develop and contribute > unit > tests as well. At least with the JIRA patch we know exactly what is > contributed and that it has been authorized. > > Unit tests was just an example. The point I was trying to make was that the earlier the community gets to look at someone's code, the better the chances are for the patch to be more complete. This potentially reduces the number of times a committer has to review a patch for a particular feature hence reducing the workload. > > > >> Would we have to make mirror requests of Infra > >> for every branch in GBM? That would also be painful. > >> > > > > No. Any branching would be updated in the next github mirror refresh. > Has this been verified? It isn't true for SVN branching. > > Why do you say that it is not true for SVN branching? Om
