On 12/16/06, Khalid B <kb@2bits.com> wrote:

A sandbox is just that: a play area for collaboration.

Restricting it to core patches is unrealistic to say the least. It will hinder code sharing, collaboration, ...etc. Karoly has given examples of why this approach is of value.

If this is just enforcing a rule, then the correct way to reevaluate why this rule is there and come out with the best policy for NOW, not just go forward with a decision that may have had valid reasons in the past.

Was there any abuse of sandboxes? I am not aware of any having monitored cvs commits for several months.

Can we please reconsider/reevalute?

Note to self: read ALL threads before replying to an old one.

Kjartan, thanks for looking at cleaning things up. We need to have policies. Enforcing this one seems retarded to core contributors like chx. Yes, people CAN turn on externally hosted repositories. And, with that, one more use of Drupal.org for collaboration dies.

As I said in a previous, older follow up, I opened up a documentation issue for writing up CVS and Sandbox policy. See http://drupal.org/node/103700

I was looking again for other policy stuff like checking in external libraries, etc. (e.g. TinyMCE) and couldn't find anything in the handbook. I created a new policy page we can edit and merge in the contributions/README.txt wording -- see http://drupal.org/node/103704

And +1 to comments on resources....who is this causing a problem for, other than your mental model of what *should* be in our CVS?

--
Boris Mann
Vancouver 778-896-2747
San Francisco 415-367-3595
Skype borismann
http://www.bryght.com