From: Guy B. K. <gu...@wa...> - 2010-02-17 14:31:49
|
On 17 Feb 2010, at 14:19, Tim Pizey wrote: > Hi Guy, > > On 17 February 2010 14:04, Guy Bolton King wrote: >> >> On 17 Feb 2010, at 13:20, Tim Pizey wrote: >> >>> Hi Guy, >>> >>> I do not have any problem with moving it to git. >> >> That's great: before getting involved in any more technical conversation, however, I think it appropriate to say _why_ I suggested this. We've had a number of minor changes that we've wanted to make (most of which you've already mentioned, like removing the dependency on concurrent.jar), and if we make these changes, we'd like to put them under source control. Ideally, we also want to share these changes with the community: currently this means we do one of: >> >> * Submit patches to the mailing list and wait for them to appear in CVS >> * Ask to become committers and make our changes on a CVS branch >> >> So I suppose I should have asked if one of the above was a sensible way forward first. > > Alex is a committer, I can make you one, let me know your SF id. guyboltonking is my ID. If we have changes we want to commit, how do you currently manage this? Do you prefer to discuss changes prior to committing them, or are you happy with changes being made on a branch for merging to HEAD after discussion/approval? Do you have any branch naming standards? Sorry for the question bombardment. Cheers, Guy. |