[development] should tinymce get a new maintainer tinymce

[Ray Zimmerman]

On Feb 8, 2007, at 10:04 PM, Darren Oh wrote:

> On Feb 8, 2007, at 8:55 PM, Kevin Reynen wrote:
>
>> Anyone have suggestions on how to deal with this?
>
> You really should make a DRUPAL-5--2 branch for the new features  
> and maintain the DRUPAL-5 branch. That way you can work avoid  
> interfering with the drupal-id's development work.

I agree, Kevin. Merge the Moxie stuff back in to tinymce DRUPAL-5 and  
make a 5.x-1.0 release ASAP based on that. Move all of the new stuff  
to DRUPAL-5--2 branch. I think there was a pretty clear community  
consensus on this as a desired direction.

Also, I'm sorry that your efforts to clear things up have continued  
to run into difficulty. Seems like it mostly has to do with a  
communication issue with drupal-id. It sounds like you need to have  
some clear communication with him about what you consider to be  
appropriate contribution from him, now that he passed ownership to  
you. You might suggest he simply use the issue queue to post patches  
for the DRUPAL-5--2 branch. Clearly, any co-maintainers need to share  
an understanding with the project owner regarding commit protocol.

-- 
Ray Zimmerman
Senior Research Associate
428-B Phillips Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
phone: (607) 255-9645