You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> on 2001/02/27 16:42:39 UTC
Re: Nomination for commit access; Brad Nicholes
From: <rb...@covalent.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:39 AM
> I agree that lighting a fire is a good thing, but I would personally
> rather see one or two APR patches from him first. I haven't really been
> paying any attention to his 1.3 patches, and I'm not comfortable giving
> out commit access without any patches to the APR list. I do think we can
> give him commit access if he posts one or two messages to the list though.
I'm not quite certain how you mean. Netware is miles from doing -anything-
in apr. It's not like a unix port, add a patch here or there.
This is a wholesale port, much like the Win32 or OS2 implementations.
Can I suggest you go back and browse some of his submissions, or simply let
those familiar with his patches push (for or against) on this? OTOH, if your
concern is granting commit access without a serious commitment on his part
to -use- the access ... then if others agree we should table and get his
commitement from him in the form of phase-1 of a Netware port.
Bill
Re: Nomination for commit access
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Sorry to bother the list with administrative bs ... really not for comment
on this list. Fat fingers.
Bill
Re: Nomination for commit access; Brad Nicholes
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> From: <rb...@covalent.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 8:39 AM
>
>
> > I agree that lighting a fire is a good thing, but I would personally
> > rather see one or two APR patches from him first. I haven't really been
> > paying any attention to his 1.3 patches, and I'm not comfortable giving
> > out commit access without any patches to the APR list. I do think we can
> > give him commit access if he posts one or two messages to the list though.
>
> I'm not quite certain how you mean. Netware is miles from doing -anything-
> in apr. It's not like a unix port, add a patch here or there.
>
> This is a wholesale port, much like the Win32 or OS2 implementations.
>
> Can I suggest you go back and browse some of his submissions, or simply let
> those familiar with his patches push (for or against) on this? OTOH, if your
> concern is granting commit access without a serious commitment on his part
> to -use- the access ... then if others agree we should table and get his
> commitement from him in the form of phase-1 of a Netware port.
Sorry, my message wasn't meant as a -1, it just wasn't a +1, more like a
+0. I understand that Netware is a complete re-write. If Netware is
miles from doing -anything-, then why will this light a fire (just
curious)?
Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------