Re: [pmapper-users] bug in pmapper 2.1.1

[Armin B. <arm...@gm...>]

If I will find some time I will have a closer look again to set up and=20
use SVN. But even in the case of an SVN "Write access to the SVN archive=20
will be provided to developers who are making frequent contributions to=20
the codebase." This is the usual policy how the SVN's I know are set up=20
(the quote comes from Postgis svn).

Until a svn exists, it's possible for users to provide me with=20
extensions, code, themes, etc. by mail. So far, this just happened once=20
(the second one was not really usable and implementable). In any case, I=20
found it normal that a contribution is discussed at least shortly before=20
sending it as zip file.

armin

ps: contributions to the p.mapper documentation were already possible=20
for everybody on the wiki since March, I haven't seen anybody writing a=20
single line for it... Ideas could be added and discussed since several=20
months.

Alessandro Pasotti wrote:
> Il 19:42, venerd=EC 20 ottobre 2006, Paolo Cavallini ha scritto:
>> That's right, but perhaps somebody else can take care of this?
>> I noticed that, given the relatively small size of the project, and th=
e
>> relative ease at modifying it, many people tend to fix bugs in their
>> particular installation, develop small new tools etc, but all this wor=
k
>> does not flow back into the main project.
>> All the best.
>> pc
>=20
> Well Paolo, I would say that this kind of decisions should be taken by =
the=20
> original author and actual maintainer.
>=20
> So the main question is: Armin where do you want to go with pmapper?
>=20
> Should it become a real cooperative project or continue like now as a=20
> one-man-project with you as leader, developer, maintainer etc. etc.
>=20
> I personally think that you (Armin) have done an impressive very good j=
ob, I=20
> like pmapper and continue to use it in my projects, but I agree with Pa=
olo=20
> (and other members of this list) that sometimes a broader discussion ab=
out=20
> new features or how to fix some issues and bug should be taken.
>=20
> Ok, now we are just saying we would like to participate more in pmapper=
=20
> development, also contributing patches, plugins, code, ideas documentat=
ion=20
> etc.
>=20
> But to allow a better cooperation we definitely need a code repository =
and a=20
> bugtracking system plus a comitee of major contributors who will take t=
he=20
> final decision on controversial topics. At least this is how other Open=
=20
> Source projects work.
>=20
> As a final note, I (and probably others) will not duplicate our job ins=
erting=20
> bugs and fixes in two systems or discussing in two lists, I really hope=
 we=20
> will find a constructive and cooperative way of improving pmapper.
>=20
> Regards.