Leo Simons wrote: >>Keep in mind that with the Incubator, perhaps only one or two people >>might already have access to subversion.
> There's well over a hundred people with write access to the parts of incubator > SVN where such stuff would live. If there's not enough of those people > willing to > handle the "apply patch" workload for this kind of stuff then we should > really be > putting that "the incubator is currently closed" sign up. If the people > sending in > proposals are not willing to take the "generate patch" workload then that's > one > reason to reject a proposal outright. > > Yep, a little barrier to entry for sure, but it might be a nice and useful > "mechanized" one without a lot of the "social engineering pain" of "policy". Well. In the case of OFBiz, for instance, I've helped them along with the bureaucratic aspects of the deal as much as I have been able to, but they have needed to work on the proposal too, because in the end, it's theirs. What's the point of working through subversion if I'm the only one doing the commits - kind of takes the point out of it, doesn't it? If subversion is just the place where the final version gets dumped, that's ok, but: It needs documenting. In any case, the proposal has been made, I think it's time that it stand or fall on its own merits, not whatever format it happens to be in or where it resides. -- David N. Welton - http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/ Linux, Open Source Consulting - http://www.dedasys.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
