[development] CVS Approval Policy: was Re: new features in D6 core?
metzlerd at metzlerd.com
Thu Nov 19 04:53:22 UTC 2009
Before one tries to solve a problem, it would be interesting to prove
or provide evidence that it exists. As a module maintainer, I think
REALLY HARD before considering creating a new module on CVS, because
I know what maintaining a module entails, and I've already worked
hard to try and get others involved in my own issue queue. I lean
towards looking for duplicate modules cause I want to pair up with
people to lessen my own workload. If I post a module, I've already
tried to find another module that does something similar, and when
possible have tried to float patches against that module to get it to
do what I want it to do. Because I KNOW my time is limited. I don't
think that I'm alone here.
Anecdotes don't count here. If we've got 5000+ modules, how many of
these are duplicates posted by maintainers of other modules. My bet
is the number is really low, and not worth investing a ton of time in.
Show me da numbers.... :)
On Nov 18, 2009, at 4:08 AM, Ashraf Amayreh wrote:
> I suddenly got this (perhaps silly) idea of only allowing a CVS
> owner to create one project and require approval by posting to the
> DEV list when wishing to create another project rather than making
> this open for all CVS owners. This would definitely help with the
> repetition problem and module boom.
> Posting to the DEV list should at least give other module
> developers and people interested the opportunity to object to,
> agree or suggest alternatives to the proposed module rather than
> suddenly finding a useless/repetitive module springing up here and
> there because the developer didn't know another one existed.
> Suggestions? Flames? Thoughts?
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Jeff Greenberg
> <jeff at ayendesigns.com> wrote:
> Dave Reid wrote:
> Again, how can one person know that one line is useful to the
> entire community if other people don't speak up about it? It
> requires the community to be involved in the process and not
> reacting to just when there are problems.
> Right, then if one person isn't qualified to know whether it would
> be useful to the community, let the community decide by downloading
> it or not.
> Ashraf Amayreh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the development