You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> on 2009/12/04 17:56:02 UTC
Moving some of the topics on the list forward.
I think we could brake the issue apart a bit. Looking at some projects
they have additional
concepts - what is maturing and who is lead on sections of the project.
I think this might give
us some advantages. (some of this is Rafi idea :-)
If we create a text file that has the different sections of the project
in it, for example:
Broker Java
Broker C++
Clients Java
Clients C#
Clients C++
Clients Ruby
Clients Python
QMF
QMan
Eclipse tools
etc.
Then those that are expert on those sections put their names under them,
for example
Alan, Andrew, Gordon, Steve under C++ broker and client (lists not
complete)
Rob, Rafi, Adian, Rajith .. under Java broker and client
etc...
This gives us a few things:
a.) First it means that someone new to the project knows who to hit up
on a section of code.
b.) It also then means that if you are not in a section, then before
committing to that section
of the code base you would ask for comment on your patch.
Thus:
a.) It establishes an way in which we can bring people onto the project
without being concerned a
committer will work outside their domain without review from other when
appropriate committers.
b.) Makes it possible to also mark some sections of the project at
different maturity also for our users.
c.) Then over time as committers work on certain sections they can add
their name to another section
of the project once they have established a deep understanding of that
part of the code.
The list could also work the other way round,
Each committer puts his name on the file, and the the sections of code
he wants to be FYI'ed on before
any major changes in that section if we want more granularity...
For example
Andrew - C++ IO
Steve Windows IO
Ted QMF
etc,
I think generally we sort of do this, but it might be worth putting some
structure in to help us manage the
growth of the project. Personally I don't want to get into the svn
access pre part of the project, the above
approach I think achieves the same and maybe more.
Thoughts.....
Carl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
Re: Moving some of the topics on the list forward.
Posted by Jonathan Robie <jo...@redhat.com>.
I really like this idea. It would have been very helpful to me when I
was new to the project.
Jonathan
On 12/04/2009 11:56 AM, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
> I think we could brake the issue apart a bit. Looking at some projects
> they have additional
> concepts - what is maturing and who is lead on sections of the
> project. I think this might give
> us some advantages. (some of this is Rafi idea :-)
>
> If we create a text file that has the different sections of the
> project in it, for example:
>
> Broker Java
> Broker C++
> Clients Java
> Clients C#
> Clients C++
> Clients Ruby
> Clients Python
> QMF
> QMan
> Eclipse tools
>
> etc.
>
> Then those that are expert on those sections put their names under
> them, for example
>
> Alan, Andrew, Gordon, Steve under C++ broker and client (lists not
> complete)
> Rob, Rafi, Adian, Rajith .. under Java broker and client
> etc...
>
> This gives us a few things:
>
> a.) First it means that someone new to the project knows who to hit up
> on a section of code.
> b.) It also then means that if you are not in a section, then before
> committing to that section
> of the code base you would ask for comment on your patch.
>
> Thus:
> a.) It establishes an way in which we can bring people onto the
> project without being concerned a
> committer will work outside their domain without review from other
> when appropriate committers.
> b.) Makes it possible to also mark some sections of the project at
> different maturity also for our users.
> c.) Then over time as committers work on certain sections they can add
> their name to another section
> of the project once they have established a deep understanding of that
> part of the code.
>
> The list could also work the other way round,
>
> Each committer puts his name on the file, and the the sections of code
> he wants to be FYI'ed on before
> any major changes in that section if we want more granularity...
>
> For example
> Andrew - C++ IO
> Steve Windows IO
> Ted QMF
>
> etc,
>
> I think generally we sort of do this, but it might be worth putting
> some structure in to help us manage the
> growth of the project. Personally I don't want to get into the svn
> access pre part of the project, the above
> approach I think achieves the same and maybe more.
>
> Thoughts.....
> Carl.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
> Project: http://qpid.apache.org
> Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org