You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> on 2013/07/29 17:31:52 UTC
[DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or issue submission?
Apache OpenOffice operates in CTR mode regarding all changes, commits to
svn repositories.
Changes to source, those files integral to the product, in reality, are
almost never made, save for compiler deprecation or option changes, without
either referencing an issue, or, in the case of larger significant changes,
a discussion on dev@openoffice.apache.org. The absence of an issue or a
discussion for a code change can lead to unnecessary vetoes, a situation no
one wants.
Now, in addition to product source files contained in /trunk, and various
branches, we have logo source files in a web area which are also product
artifacts:
http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/
Better placement for these source files is under discussion. See current
mail thread:
http://markmail.org/message/6aoohsq4jbx5z7us
Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06
were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an issue
submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's decision
to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals to new
files and restore the originals. As with any changes, we welcome any
discussion concerning these changes.
So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before
new commits?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
-- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by "Marcus (OOo)" <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 07/31/2013 07:23 PM, schrieb janI:
> On 31 July 2013 17:57, Kay Schenk<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI<ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti<pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/
>> <
>>>>> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
>>>>>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
>>>>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
>>>>>>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an
>>> issue
>>>>>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
>>>>> decision
>>>>>>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
>>>>>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
>>>>>> discussed here first.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for
>>> other
>>>>> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of
>> e.g.
>>>>> release notes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have
>> a
>>>>>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion
>>> before
>>>>>>> new commits?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
>>>>>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the
>> website.
>>>>>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile
>> !!
>>> For
>>>>> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
>>>>> already policy ?
>>>
>>> I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may
>> be
>>> either of two types of warnings.
>>>
>>> Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed.
>>>
>>> Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require
>>> discussion.
>>>
>>> The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in
>>> affect.
>>>
>>
>> I think this is a sensible approach -- documenting certain areas/entities
>> (release notes were on CWiki this time) that requires more discussion or
>> are specified as RTC by default.
>>
>> We don't have a "branding" area yet, but we may soon.
>>
>
> Please dont forget the latest discussions about screenshots. When we define
> "branding" areas and other sensible areas, we should make sure that the
> source files for screenshots etc are incuded.
A branding area is a very good idea. Of course we need 2:
1) for the source code: logos, icons, license, notice, readme etc.
2) for the websites: logos, screenshots, release notes etc.
Here we can define a different handling like RTC and explain this in a
"WARNING.txt" file.
Marcus
>>> It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the discussion.
>>> We wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may
>> start
>>> to create release notes by adding and then making a series of
>>> modifications. There would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We
>>> wouldn't need a discussion for every little change. It is more we want to
>>> be aware these are happening. The community can then help in very way
>> from
>>> criticism to translation to whatever.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> rgds
>>>>> jan I.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Andrea.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>>>>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
>>>>
>>>> http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
>>>> http://community.apache.org/committers/
>>>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
>>>>
>>>> I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be
>>>> used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
>>>> changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it
>> looks
>>>> like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 10:23 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 31 July 2013 17:57, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Kay Schenk wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > >
> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/
> > <
> > > >>
> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
> > > >>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
> > > >>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
> > > >>>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an
> > > issue
> > > >>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
> > > >> decision
> > > >>>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
> > > >>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
> > > >>> discussed here first.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for
> > > other
> > > >> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of
> > e.g.
> > > >> release notes.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to
> have
> > a
> > > >>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion
> > > before
> > > >>>> new commits?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
> > > >>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the
> > website.
> > > >>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile
> > !!
> > > For
> > > >> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it
> was
> > > >> already policy ?
> > >
> > > I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may
> > be
> > > either of two types of warnings.
> > >
> > > Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed.
> > >
> > > Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require
> > > discussion.
> > >
> > > The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in
> > > affect.
> > >
> >
> > I think this is a sensible approach -- documenting certain areas/entities
> > (release notes were on CWiki this time) that requires more discussion or
> > are specified as RTC by default.
> >
> > We don't have a "branding" area yet, but we may soon.
> >
>
> Please dont forget the latest discussions about screenshots. When we define
> "branding" areas and other sensible areas, we should make sure that the
> source files for screenshots etc are incuded.
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
good point! I think we may have a lot to track down.
>
> >
> >
> > > It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the
> discussion.
> > > We wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may
> > start
> > > to create release notes by adding and then making a series of
> > > modifications. There would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We
> > > wouldn't need a discussion for every little change. It is more we want
> to
> > > be aware these are happening. The community can then help in very way
> > from
> > > criticism to translation to whatever.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Dave
> > >
> > >
> > > >>
> > > >> rgds
> > > >> jan I.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>> Andrea.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> > > >> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
> > > >
> > > > http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
> > > > http://community.apache.org/committers/
> > > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
> > > >
> > > > I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should
> be
> > > > used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
> > > > changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it
> > looks
> > > > like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > MzK
> > > >
> > > > Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
> > > > -- Jon Bon Jovi
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
> > -- Jon Bon Jovi
> >
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
-- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 31 July 2013 17:57, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Kay Schenk wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/
> <
> > >> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
> > >>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
> > >>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
> > >>>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an
> > issue
> > >>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
> > >> decision
> > >>>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
> > >>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
> > >>> discussed here first.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for
> > other
> > >> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of
> e.g.
> > >> release notes.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have
> a
> > >>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion
> > before
> > >>>> new commits?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
> > >>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the
> website.
> > >>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile
> !!
> > For
> > >> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
> > >> already policy ?
> >
> > I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may
> be
> > either of two types of warnings.
> >
> > Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed.
> >
> > Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require
> > discussion.
> >
> > The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in
> > affect.
> >
>
> I think this is a sensible approach -- documenting certain areas/entities
> (release notes were on CWiki this time) that requires more discussion or
> are specified as RTC by default.
>
> We don't have a "branding" area yet, but we may soon.
>
Please dont forget the latest discussions about screenshots. When we define
"branding" areas and other sensible areas, we should make sure that the
source files for screenshots etc are incuded.
rgds
jan I.
>
>
> > It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the discussion.
> > We wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may
> start
> > to create release notes by adding and then making a series of
> > modifications. There would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We
> > wouldn't need a discussion for every little change. It is more we want to
> > be aware these are happening. The community can then help in very way
> from
> > criticism to translation to whatever.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > >>
> > >> rgds
> > >> jan I.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>> Andrea.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> > >> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
> > >
> > > http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
> > > http://community.apache.org/committers/
> > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
> > >
> > > I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be
> > > used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
> > > changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it
> looks
> > > like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > MzK
> > >
> > > Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
> > > -- Jon Bon Jovi
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
> -- Jon Bon Jovi
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Kay Schenk wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>
> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/<
> >> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
> >>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
> >>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
> >>>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an
> issue
> >>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
> >> decision
> >>>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
> >>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
> >>> discussed here first.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for
> other
> >> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of e.g.
> >> release notes.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
> >>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion
> before
> >>>> new commits?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
> >>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website.
> >>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
> >>>
> >>
> >> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile !!
> For
> >> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
> >> already policy ?
>
> I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may be
> either of two types of warnings.
>
> Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed.
>
> Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require
> discussion.
>
> The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in
> affect.
>
I think this is a sensible approach -- documenting certain areas/entities
(release notes were on CWiki this time) that requires more discussion or
are specified as RTC by default.
We don't have a "branding" area yet, but we may soon.
> It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the discussion.
> We wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may start
> to create release notes by adding and then making a series of
> modifications. There would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We
> wouldn't need a discussion for every little change. It is more we want to
> be aware these are happening. The community can then help in very way from
> criticism to translation to whatever.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> >>
> >> rgds
> >> jan I.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Andrea.
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> >> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
> >
> > http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
> > http://community.apache.org/committers/
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
> >
> > I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be
> > used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
> > changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it looks
> > like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
> > -- Jon Bon Jovi
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
-- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or issue submission?
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jul 30, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/<
>> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
>>>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
>>>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
>>>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an issue
>>>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
>> decision
>>>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
>>> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
>>> discussed here first.
>>>
>>
>> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for other
>> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of e.g.
>> release notes.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
>>>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before
>>>> new commits?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
>>> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website.
>>> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
>>>
>>
>> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile !! For
>> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
>> already policy ?
I'm ok with adding WARNING.txt as appropriate. I can see that there may be either of two types of warnings.
Full RTC - where any change including additions should be discussed.
Adds CTR and updates RTC - where changes to existing artifacts require discussion.
The branding tree and release notes are examples of where this is in affect.
It may be that changes are being made and reviewed during the discussion. We wouldn't be so strict. For example before the 4.1 release. Rob may start to create release notes by adding and then making a series of modifications. There would be a [DISCUSS] Starting release notes. We wouldn't need a discussion for every little change. It is more we want to be aware these are happening. The community can then help in very way from criticism to translation to whatever.
Regards,
Dave
>>
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Andrea.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
>> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
>
> http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
> http://community.apache.org/committers/
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
>
> I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be
> used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
> changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it looks
> like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
> -- Jon Bon Jovi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:00 PM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Kay Schenk wrote:
> >
> >>
> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/<
> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
> >> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
> >> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
> >> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an issue
> >> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's
> decision
> >> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
> >>
> >
> > Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
> > "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
> > discussed here first.
> >
>
> I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for other
> "sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of e.g.
> release notes.
>
>
> >
> > So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
> >> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before
> >> new commits?
> >>
> >
> > I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
> > significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website.
> > Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
> >
>
> +1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile !! For
> significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
> already policy ?
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
> >
> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<
> dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Here is some information on decision making/discussions:
http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/decision-making.html
http://community.apache.org/committers/
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles
I could not find any specific "rules" on when decision making should be
used. In OpenOffice, it is used on a regular basis for many different
changes, but WHEN to use it doesn't seem to be set in stone. And it looks
like, some projects have defined their own criteria.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
Success is falling nine times and getting up ten."
-- Jon Bon Jovi
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 29 July 2013 23:05, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Kay Schenk wrote:
>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/**marketing/art/galleries/logos/**aoo-working/<http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/>
>> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
>> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_**selected_2013-06
>> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an issue
>> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's decision
>> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
>>
>
> Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
> "aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
> discussed here first.
>
I like the WARNING.txt file, could we agree to use the same file for other
"sensible" (not sure if that is the right word) areas ? I think of e.g.
release notes.
>
> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
>> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before
>> new commits?
>>
>
> I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
> significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website.
> Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
>
+1, lets not make it too complicated to work, that said with a smile !! For
significant code changes, a discussion is a must, but I thought it was
already policy ?
rgds
jan I.
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.org<de...@openoffice.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Should source changes require [discussion] and/or
issue submission?
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Kay Schenk wrote:
> http://www.openoffice.org/marketing/art/galleries/logos/aoo-working/
> Last week, two of the original svg files -- files prefixed with:
> Apache_OpenOffice_Logo_ChrisR_selected_2013-06
> were changed. These changes were not discussed in advance, nor an issue
> submitted for them. Given the events of the day, it was the PMC's decision
> to not veto these changes, but to copy these changed originals
Thank you Kay for the reminder. I added a WARNING.txt file to the
"aoo-working" directory to help avoiding changes that have not been
discussed here first.
> So, back the original topic. Given recent events, do we want to have a
> changed policy to require issue submission and/or list discussion before
> new commits?
I'd say we don't need it in general; it will be helpful for all
significant code changes, but surely we don't need it for the website.
Let's rely on common sense and peer scrutiny.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org