[development] Drupal's CVS policies... including 'foriegn' codein TinyMCE module?
matt at mattfarina.com
Tue May 29 03:15:29 UTC 2007
This reminds me how much I love FreeBSD.
On May 28, 2007, at 10:06 PM, mark burdett wrote:
> Seems like module maintainers could just "officially" incorporate
> GPL code into their module, meaning they will support it (hopefully
> including contributing bug reports and patches "upstream"). Thus
> it's no longer "third-party code," it's part of the drupal module
> which they are maintaining.
> I wouldn't consider this "ideal".. but it would be a major task to
> build something like "drupal ports", where tarballs are downloaded
> from the vendor and then patch files are applied if necessary.
> speaking of which, it's interesting that on freebsd you can install
> drupal tinymce module from ports, http://www.freshports.org/www/
> drupal5-tinymce, which depends on tinymce http://www.freshports.org/
> www/tinymce (tinymce is downloaded from sourceforge if you "build"
> it), and symlinks the server-wide tinymce into the drupal module
> directory. I happen to use freebsd but hadn't given much thought
> about using it to manage the installation of drupal modules..
> On 5/27/07, Walt Daniels <wdlists at optonline.net> wrote:
> +100 on this
> It is trivial to implement just change the policy (but add a pretty
> permission somewhere in the process).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: development-bounces at drupal.org [mailto:development-
> bounces at drupal.org]
> On Behalf Of Derek Wright
> Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 4:12 AM
> To: development at drupal.org
> Subject: Re: [development] Drupal's CVS policies... including
> codein TinyMCE module?
> 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
> how many times do i have to say it?
> 1) our existing policy is too strict, and should be relaxed under some
> 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
> that people read what i'm saying about this topic, and respected my
> enough to reply (even if you disagree, at least address the points i'm
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.0/819 - Release Date:
> 10:47 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the development