[development] Drupal Enhancement Proposals (DEPs)
adrian at bryght.com
Sat Nov 12 22:41:39 UTC 2005
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 12 Nov 2005, at 11:54 PM, Jose A. Reyero wrote:
> Completely agree with Adrian. We do need this.
> Only I would ask that this formal proccess doesn't mean too much
> administrative overhead for every new project. So, basically, a new
> section to know other people's 'big plans' and see easily 'who's
> on what' would do. If we have one html page for each project and one
> 'coordinator' that maintains that page, keeps a list of related queued
> patches, and the people involved, that would be a good start point.
> the rest, the patch queue and the forum will do.
Exactly. I don't want us to be designing software around this.
> One of the main problems I see with the patch queue is that it's not
> practical at all when trying to get big patches in.
This is the other thing DEPs do, they split big patches into seperate
tasks, each with their own
ticket. Or atleast, theoretically.
> The work it takes to
> have the patch up to date with HEAD, while people is reviewing it is
> really overwhelming.
This is why i want to move to supplying subversion repositories for
each of the large projects.
It worked great with Forms. But now we're getting too deep into
future architecture development again.
> So what if we took some snapshot of the core as the
> starting point for each of this projects, and once the code has been
> reviewed and polished enough by the people involved in that particular
> project, we update it for head once as 'ready to be committed',
> and... ?
That's why you have a seperate repository. =)
Drupal developer and Bryght Guy
http://drupal.org | http://bryght.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the development