whiteboard

[Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>]

I'm watching the whiteboard and it would be great if people could keep the
whiteboard separated by originator's name.

whiteboard
 > jonbcampos
  > content
 > etc

This way we don't conflict with:

whiteboard
 > di
 > di-idea2
 > different-di-idea
 > tabnavigator
 > tabnavigator2
 > nother-tabnav

Thanks. Just throwing out an idea.

-- 
Jonathan Campos

Re: whiteboard

[Jun Heider <ju...@realeyes.com>]

On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Michael Schmalle wrote:

> Quoting Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>:
> 
>> I'm watching the whiteboard and it would be great if people could keep the
>> whiteboard separated by originator's name.
>> 
>> whiteboard
>> > jonbcampos
>>  > content
>> > etc

I would agree with Jon on this. Although not necessary I think it will really help in the long run to start whiteboard areas with committer name folder.

Re: whiteboard

[Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>]

Quoting Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>:

> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Michael Schmalle  
> <mi...@teotigraphix.com>wrote:
>
>> Sounds like things need to be talked about here, I would suggest you list
>> out some other things if you have them.
>
>
> I can't remember the exact response but I want to say it was shown in
> previous examples to be using the username.
>
> I wasn't trying to pick on the "navigators" folder or the "mobile-popups"
> folder. I can just see this naming causing a problem really really quickly
> where usernames will not.
>
> --
> Jonathan Campos
>

Hi Jonathan,

I totally agree with you and that is what I wanted to. I moved the  
folder into mschmalle, I can tell I having been using GIT way to long,  
messed up the move commit.

Mike

Re: whiteboard

[Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>wrote:

> Sounds like things need to be talked about here, I would suggest you list
> out some other things if you have them.


I can't remember the exact response but I want to say it was shown in
previous examples to be using the username.

I wasn't trying to pick on the "navigators" folder or the "mobile-popups"
folder. I can just see this naming causing a problem really really quickly
where usernames will not.

-- 
Jonathan Campos

Re: whiteboard

[Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>]

Quoting Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>:

>>  I don't think I have to say that I would never go into something and
>> delete stuff without talking to the contributor.
>>
>
> my mistake, sorry Mike - so in general lets say somebody wants to work on
> something in the whiteboard, would you create your own copy of it or put it
> in the original folder?
>
> I'm just asking because with the username in the folder, the situation
> could arise that the code was originally put in the whiteboard by own
> committer but 99% of the code got contributed by somebody else.
>
> Guessing that is not an issue but might create some confusion.
>
> - Peter
>

Hi Peter,

I asked the exact same questions(creating a "branch" folder, committer  
directory by name) to Dave and he said that a lot of the times you  
just go in hacking. I really need to find the exact thread of  
discussion so you can read what he said.

Obviously this is our project so agreeing on this stuff is essential  
to a happy community and development spirit. :)

Mike

RE: whiteboard

[David Arno <da...@davidarno.org>]

> From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacretaz@apache.org] 
> Sent: 10 January 2012 11:03

>> ...So basically, your saying there really shouldn't be any traces of 
>> copyright or author in a source file correct? Just the Apache 2 license header....

> In general, yes.

That sounds like a very good rule to me.

David.

Re: whiteboard

[Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Michael Schmalle
<mi...@teotigraphix.com> wrote:

> ...So basically, your saying there really shouldn't be any traces of copyright
> or author in a source file correct? Just the Apache 2 license header....

In general, yes.

-Bertrand

Re: whiteboard

[Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>]

Quoting Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>:

> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Jonathan Campos  
> <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...I wasn't worried about ownership. I guess that is what header
>> files are for:
>>
>> author: person A
>> contributors: person B, C, and D
>
> If you mean adding that in source file headers, that's frowned upon  
> at Apache.
>
> The problem is that down the line people might contact person A
> directly instead of talking to this list - person A might not want to
> get direct queries, and it's good for everybody to see other's
> questions.
>
> Also, "svn annotate" (or
> http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=incubator%2Fflex%2Ftrunk)
> is a much more precise way of knowing who wrote which code, for the
> rare cases when that's needed.
>
> -Bertrand
>

So basically, your saying there really shouldn't be any traces of  
copyright or author in a source file correct? Just the Apache 2  
license header.

Mike

Re: whiteboard

[Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...I wasn't worried about ownership. I guess that is what header
> files are for:
>
> author: person A
> contributors: person B, C, and D

If you mean adding that in source file headers, that's frowned upon at Apache.

The problem is that down the line people might contact person A
directly instead of talking to this list - person A might not want to
get direct queries, and it's good for everybody to see other's
questions.

Also, "svn annotate" (or
http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=incubator%2Fflex%2Ftrunk)
is a much more precise way of knowing who wrote which code, for the
rare cases when that's needed.

-Bertrand

Re: whiteboard

[Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm just asking because with the username in the folder, the situation
> could arise that the code was originally put in the whiteboard by own
> committer but 99% of the code got contributed by somebody else.
>

In my case I wasn't worried about ownership. I guess that is what header
files are for:

author: person A
contributors: person B, C, and D

I was just worried about confusing up the folder structure. Once inside a
dev's whiteboard I wouldn't argue too much about a dev's organization.
Except the .* files. I would just think that people don't want to have
those in the repo either way.

-- 
Jonathan Campos

Re: whiteboard

[Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>]

Quoting Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>:

> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ...so in general lets say somebody wants to work on
>> something in the whiteboard, would you create your own copy of it or put it
>> in the original folder?...
>
> In general I'd say everyone's welcome to touch any code as long as
> they know what they are doing - and that might include asking
> whoever's currently working on the module in question if that's ok.
>
> -Bertrand
>

I would just like to say I have been noticing something about this  
project that might be a tad different then a lot of projects that  
start up in Apache. A lot of Apache projects come from people that are  
already working together freely (as a singular unit).

Flex is different we have corporations, single entities etc that have  
never worked with each other once. Since Flex was a completely  
commercial project and product to begin with I think it's safe to  
assume there are going to be a lot of discussions like these about the  
"Apache Way" verses how my corporation does it or has done it.

I have no real opinion here just noticing a trend.

Mike

Re: whiteboard

[Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In general I'd say everyone's welcome to touch any code as long as
>> they know what they are doing - and that might include asking
>> whoever's currently working on the module in question if that's ok.
>>
>
> Maybe I'm overthinking this, but how would the original committer need to
> be contacted? Does that type of thing also happen on the list to have it on
> the record or do you reach out to the committer directly?..

On list - not necessarily to have it on the record, but everything
happens on list ;-)

>
> I like the idea of everyone being allowed to touch anything, but can
> imagine different people might have different goals and get in each others
> way...

In my Apache book the default is that I'm allowed to touch anything if
I know what I'm doing and if I can reasonably expect that I'm not
getting in the way of the work being done on that code.

But I'm also ready to back out if someone asks me to - svn makes it
easy to revert any unwanted changes, so if asked I will revert.

Of course, sometimes someone will ask for a code freeze on some part
of the code, or tell others that they're doing major changes somewhere
and expect to be left alone for a bit, that's fine. Or we kick them
out to their own branch if that gets in the way of the overall
progress.

I'd try to keep it simple, and address issues if/as they come up.

-Bertrand

Re: whiteboard

[Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>]

> In general I'd say everyone's welcome to touch any code as long as
> they know what they are doing - and that might include asking
> whoever's currently working on the module in question if that's ok.
>


Maybe I'm overthinking this, but how would the original committer need to
be contacted? Does that type of thing also happen on the list to have it on
the record or do you reach out to the committer directly?

I like the idea of everyone being allowed to touch anything, but can
imagine different people might have different goals and get in each others
way.


- Peter

Re: whiteboard

[Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 11:48 PM, Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...so in general lets say somebody wants to work on
> something in the whiteboard, would you create your own copy of it or put it
> in the original folder?...

In general I'd say everyone's welcome to touch any code as long as
they know what they are doing - and that might include asking
whoever's currently working on the module in question if that's ok.

-Bertrand

Re: whiteboard

[Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>]

>  I don't think I have to say that I would never go into something and
> delete stuff without talking to the contributor.
>

my mistake, sorry Mike - so in general lets say somebody wants to work on
something in the whiteboard, would you create your own copy of it or put it
in the original folder?

I'm just asking because with the username in the folder, the situation
could arise that the code was originally put in the whiteboard by own
committer but 99% of the code got contributed by somebody else.

Guessing that is not an issue but might create some confusion.

- Peter

Re: whiteboard

[Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>]

Quoting Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>:

>> Sounds like things need to be talked about here, I would suggest you list
>> out some other things if you have them.
>>
>
>
> Also agree with Jonathan on getting some structure in the whiteboard and
> using username folders.
>
> It would be good to know how we define the whiteboard stuff, I assumed it
> was personal experimental work. Is it expected that others just contribute
> to the same package and make changes?
>
> Noticed earlier the .* files from Tink's navigators contribution got
> removed by somebody - while that might turn out to be a good best practice
> - is the whiteboard contributor not the one who should administer his
> experimental area? Its just something for us to decide on how we handle
> this and collaborate in whiteboards, not trying to specifically highlight
> this as a problem.
>
> - Peter
>

Well in a discussion with Tink on list, I can't remember what thread  
he said hack away. I am looking at that project so, the list said we  
don't like development files. Since I was working in that folder, I  
removed them.

I don't think I have to say that I would never go into something and  
delete stuff without talking to the contributor.

Mike

Re: whiteboard

[Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>]

> Sounds like things need to be talked about here, I would suggest you list
> out some other things if you have them.
>


Also agree with Jonathan on getting some structure in the whiteboard and
using username folders.

It would be good to know how we define the whiteboard stuff, I assumed it
was personal experimental work. Is it expected that others just contribute
to the same package and make changes?

Noticed earlier the .* files from Tink's navigators contribution got
removed by somebody - while that might turn out to be a good best practice
- is the whiteboard contributor not the one who should administer his
experimental area? Its just something for us to decide on how we handle
this and collaborate in whiteboards, not trying to specifically highlight
this as a problem.

- Peter

Re: whiteboard

[Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>]

Quoting Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>:

> I'm watching the whiteboard and it would be great if people could keep the
> whiteboard separated by originator's name.
>
> whiteboard
>  > jonbcampos
>   > content
>  > etc
>
> This way we don't conflict with:
>
> whiteboard
>  > di
>  > di-idea2
>  > different-di-idea
>  > tabnavigator
>  > tabnavigator2
>  > nother-tabnav
>
> Thanks. Just throwing out an idea.
>
> --
> Jonathan Campos
>

This came up and Dave Fisher said in the past it really didn't matter.  
I asked this exact question.

Sounds like things need to be talked about here, I would suggest you  
list out some other things if you have them.

Again, I was going off of what he said.

Mike