Sorry for being late to this discussion. Have been
travelling for the last few weeks and apparently failing
miserably at keeping up with email and meetings...
We went through this whole discussion when Gemini was first
formed, and as a result of many of the limitations we ended
up with separate subprojects. I agree that it would be great
if the ACL committer lists, IP logs, separate release plans,
release reviews and schedules, etc. etc. were more flexible
in the project, but when it comes down to it, and you have
multiple different release artifacts for multiple different
technologies, and the list of things that are different
between them gets so high that there is not much in common,
you kind of end up concluding that they really are different
projects. In the case of Gemini Blueprint, I think it's fair
to say that the problem wasn't that Blueprint committers
were separate from the rest of the Gemini committers, but
that Blueprint was basically stagnating and inactive as a
project, resulting in a void of active committers.
-Mike
On 27/04/2012 6:20 AM, Glyn Normington wrote:
At the last RT PMC call there was discussion
of Gemini's subproject structure. Recently, one of the
subprojects temporarily had no committers and the thought
was expressed on the call that this could perhaps be
avoided in future by amalgamating the Gemini subproject
committers into a single ACL. Presumably this would
require amalgamating the subprojects into one.
I spoke to Mike Keith about this and it seems that it
is necessary to keep the subproject structure so that
individual subprojects can be released independently of
each other (which is essential). For example, the
subproject structure enables IP logs to be managed and
approved separately.
So is the conclusion that we can't amalgamate the
ACLs without losing the ability to release subprojects
independently of each other?
_______________________________________________
rt-pmc mailing list
rt-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rt-pmc
