Re: [Wxdevide-devs] Which Help File Format and other questions.

[Malcolm N. <m.n...@wa...>]

On 05/10/2008 19:51, Tony Reina wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Nuklear Zelph <nuk...@gm... 
> <mailto:nuk...@gm...>> wrote:
>
>
>     i think that the seniority model works except that it needs to be
>     geard a little more to experience. not say time we've been
>     programmers, but the experience we have on areas of the code. so
>     already we know that Edward built the Skindoc designer and
>     converted all the code in svn currently. not that all of it will
>     be used maybe, but he knows it better than the rest of us. Esteban
>     took care of the plugin system so he knows more than us there.
>     even if others have worked on a plugin system, he also knows what
>     it takes for an ide specifically and more specifically for what
>     dev has in it. you get my drift. so since we are all starting here
>     at the same time, it makes the most sense that the developer who
>     knows the area in conflict best have the highest dibs. but
>     majority still rules.
>
>
> I for one will base my vote on who has the most experience with the 
> particular issue in question. For example, if it's an issue with the 
> Skindoc, then I'll be listening to Sof.T. more than to Mal (especially 
> if Mal's had too many Southern Comforts ;>).
You can never have too many Southern Comforts. :-D

>
>
>     as for newer comming devs, they never get quite the rights we do.
>     not that there is going to need to be a seperation, but we all
>     created this from the beggining and have experience with the last
>     project, this is somewhat a continuance of. so they just don't
>     have the experience is what it boils down to.
>
>
> Yes, developers that come later I think will "move up the ranks". In 
> my opinion, they should first be running their patches/bugs fixes/etc. 
> through the core developers. Once we are satisfied that the person 
> knows what they are doing, then we'd grant them their own SVN access. 
> Admins/core developers should be limited to people who have shown 
> their commitment to the project.

I think that this is more or less a standard method on Open Source 
projects.

>
> Nevertheless, I think that whenever a developer (core or not) commits 
> significant changes to SVN, that they should let the list know about 
> it and give a brief description of the changes. Of course, simple bug 
> fixes don't need such formaility. The rule of thumb: If you think 
> someone will object to your commit, then ask first.

But we do need to actively appraise these changes. I have unfortunately 
seen that a lot of work has gone into something only to have it vetoed 
much later than needed. (not speaking necessarily of this project) I 
think to reduce this as much, then we have to enforce a time scale. I am 
aware that not everyone spends as much time with the computer as I (not 
that I am programming the whole time) so waiting for longer than a day 
for a reply from me is usually rare (except when SF/my provider screws 
around - I received a mail today that I mailed to a list Friday), but we 
do have to at least try to monitor the mailings daily. Patches should be 
examined, and tested. There is a lot we can do to make developing this a 
pleasurable fun experience. We should try to keep it that way.

Best
Mal