[development] Drupal's CVS policies... including 'foriegn' codein TinyMCE module?

[Matthew Farina]

Simple question.... what is stopping a change in policy?

Is is just the number of extra hours the CVS maintainers will have to  
put in to maintaining CVS?

- Matt

On May 27, 2007, at 5:16 AM, Wim Leers wrote:

> I must say that I strongly agree with Derek.
>
> An attempt to summarize:
> 1) The current policy is unfriendly to both module maintainers and  
> module users.
> 2) Strict rules simplify maintenance and avoid chaos. But in this  
> case, that's not true: more chaos is created!
> 3) Packaging scripts would have their own (quite major) problems,  
> so that's no solution either.
>
> Shouldn't that be enough to change the policy? It would mean less  
> work for everybody involved:
> 1) The CVS guardians don't have to do anything more or less at all.
> 2) The additional files shouldn't affect CVS performance.
> 3) Module maintainers don't have to worry anymore about how to make  
> the downloading and installing of foreign code as painless as  
> possible, as it will be included in the module.
> 4) Module users wouldn't even have to know they're using foreign  
> code. The added advantage is that (especially with the  
> update_status module installed, which will be in D6 core) they will  
> probably update more often than when they'd have to download the  
> foreign code themselves. So this is more secure IMHO, not less. Of  
> course this depends on the module maintainer. But a module doesn't  
> have to rely on foreign code to be insecure, so this point still  
> stands.
>
> Of course, only GPL'ed foreign code could be included.
>
> I hope this summary helps in making the necessary decisions.
>
> Wim
>
> On May 27, 2007, at 10:11 , Derek Wright wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 26, 2007, at 9:29 PM, Boris Mann wrote:
>>
>>> A patch to the project module / packaging scripts and/or an  
>>> architecture doc on how such a thing would be built would be more  
>>> useful.
>>
>> (trying not to lose my temper...)
>>
>> WTF?  are you people not getting or not reading my messages?   
>> Gerhard seems to have completely ignored my input on the  
>> discussion, and now you are, too...
>>
>> how many times do i have to say it?
>>
>> 1) our existing policy is too strict, and should be relaxed under  
>> some circumstances.
>>
>> 2) it would require a *MASSIVE* (wasted) effort to try to solve  
>> this problem via modifying our packaging script.  please RTF  
>> previous email of mine for details.  i will *NOT* accept patches  
>> that attempt to do this.  "won't fix" on sight...
>>
>> so, of all the many ways i've asked for help on project*, please  
>> do not try to "help" by working on such a patch. ;)
>>
>> also, given how much time and energy i've spent on the care and  
>> feeding of our CVS repositories, i wish i was at least being taken  
>> seriously enough that people read what i'm saying about this  
>> topic, and respected my views enough to reply (even if you  
>> disagree, at least address the points i'm making)...
>>
>> thanks,
>> -derek
>>
>>
>