Mischievous registration of projects
Hi all, Maybe I talk through my hat, but I suggest a policy against mischievous registration of projects for the purpose of claiming namespace, e.g. opensocial, or for other reasons than providing a module, e.g. cvsdemo? Thomas
Thomas Barregren wrote:
Hi all,
Maybe I talk through my hat, but I suggest a policy against mischievous registration of projects for the purpose of claiming namespace, e.g. opensocial, or for other reasons than providing a module, e.g. cvsdemo?
Thomas
I believe cvsdemo is related to http://code.google.com/p/google-highly-open-participation-drupal/issues/deta...
Please don't make the registration process difficult or slower. It is better to focus on post-checking - if the module has not proven any activity, some action might be taken, but not sooner than that. roman On Nov 30, 2007 1:57 PM, Thomas Barregren <thomas@webbredaktoren.se> wrote:
Hi all,
Maybe I talk through my hat, but I suggest a policy against mischievous registration of projects for the purpose of claiming namespace, e.g. opensocial, or for other reasons than providing a module, e.g. cvsdemo?
Thomas
registration of projects for the purpose of claiming namespace, e.g. opensocial
OpenSoical was opened in the hope people will participant and when the Drupal.org webmasters realized this, we contacted whoever registered it and he deleted it immediately. No sweat. I think we still are not at the point where you need webmaster approval for your project. I do not want to get there, mind you. If there is a problem, just contact the webmasters.
Quoting Thomas Barregren <thomas@webbredaktoren.se>:
Hi all,
Maybe I talk through my hat, but I suggest a policy against mischievous registration of projects for the purpose of claiming namespace, e.g. opensocial, or for other reasons than providing a module, e.g. cvsdemo?
There are procedures in place for taking over a project. Review this mailing list archive. If it isn't active even if it never became a project you should follow the procedure. Earnie -- http://for-my-kids.com/ -- http://give-me-an-offer.com/
@David: Fair enough. @Roman, @Karoly: I don't suggest any changes to the registration process. I simply suggest that we, as a community, put the foot down, and make a clear statement that mischievous registration of CVS modules and d.o. projects will be frown upon. @Darrel: I agree that "it is perfectly fair to grab your namespace, as long as you have some code or something alpha." I only object to registrations of CVS modules without fairly code or d.o. projects without any releases. @Earnie: Prevention is better than cure. But of course, even with an explicit policy against it, unfair registration of CVS modules and d.o. projects will still happen -- but hopefully less frequently than today -- and in that case the takeover of a project, as you suggest, is a way out of it. During my 2 yeas and 44 weeks as member of this community, I have closely monitored http://drupal.org/taxonomy/term/14. Up till recently, unfair registrations was almost never seen. But for a couple of months ago, a rush into the land of good (?) module and project names took off. Currently, it is no big deal, just a name or two every week. But I am concerned that this, in my opinion, misuse can unfold to a real problem. Maybe I am the only one who has this concern. But if not, I suggest that the CVS Usage Policy <http://drupal.org/node/103704> strongly express that registrations of CVS modules without also checking in fairly code will be frown upon, and that the Submit Project form <http://drupal.org/node/add/project_project/> strongly express that registrations of projects without also making a release node is unacceptable. Thomas
On Dec 1, 2007, at 2:56 AM, Thomas Barregren wrote:
and that the Submit Project form <http://drupal.org/node/add/ project_project/> strongly express that registrations of projects without also making a release node is unacceptable.
I disagree with this. People should (re)read the email I sent almost exactly 1 year ago about why people shouldn't put in-development code in the sandbox, but should instead use actual project nodes for it... http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/development/2006-December/021316.html This was in response to a huge, ugly thread about removing the CVS sandbox entirely, so don't worry about the first few paragraphs, and instead focus on the rest of it, starting with:
that said, after reading all the related threads, i've noticed a few important misconceptions about how project nodes, release nodes, and our CVS repository interact with each other. i'll grant that all of this has been in flux (hopefully for the better) for the last year, but i think it's essential to clear these up as this discussion of the sandboxes evolves:
... i specifically talk about why it's sometimes a good idea to create a project node but not necessarily create any release nodes. enjoy, -derek (dww)
participants (6)
-
David Norman -
Derek Wright -
Earnie Boyd -
Karoly Negyesi -
Roman Chyla -
Thomas Barregren