[mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to work in a sandbox

Fri Jun 26 06:33:00 EDT 2009

Hi Zac,

Nice find.  It is another option to explore.  But I think we would only need the Crucible portion of Studio.  We already have an issue tracker, wiki, repository viewer, and subversion repository.  One thing I would be concerned about is integration with our existing infrastructure.  Crucible seems to be integrated with Studio.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 4:01 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to work in a sandbox

http://www.atlassian.com/studio/ ? it's free for opensource projects

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Trevor Wekel<trevor.wekel at autodesk.com> wrote:
> And next thing we need to look at is an online code review tool to make the whole review process easier to manage.  Using patch files is ok but they are a hassle for any significant code change.  I did a quick internet search and there are a number of open source code review tools available.  Some are more stable and active than others:
>
> http://www.review-board.org/
>
> http://codestriker.sourceforge.net/
>
> http://groogle.sourceforge.net/
>
> http://code.google.com/p/jupiter-eclipse-plugin/
>
> Does any on the list have experience with any of these tools?  Anyone know of any good alternatives?
>
> I, and all the other Autodesk developers, have experience with SmartBear's Code Collaborator.  I originally discounted it from the list but I found a little note on their Pricing page saying that it is "FREE for Open Source Projects!".  Since OSGeo is all open source, it might make sense to see if SAC would be interested in it.
>
> http://smartbear.com/codecollab.php
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
> Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 2:29 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to work in a sandbox
>
> I concur with Kenneth.
>
> being more liberal with sandboxes, makes the currently opaque process of
> getting commit access a lot more visible.
>
> Code review by committed fixes with comments, much easier?
>
> Subversion sandboxes are so cheap resource wise, creating one
> is just a pointer in the db.
>
> more sandboxes!
>
> z
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF
> A/S<ks at geograf.dk> wrote:
>> Tom,
>>
>> I don't think you are being dense. We just see this from different angles.
>>
>> Your request is to allow some qualified developers acceptable working
>> conditions.
>> I totally support that. The more the merrier.
>>
>> But, your request looks very similar to a request made by UV a little while
>> back. His request was denied, because there was no means of getting a
>> sandbox.
>>
>> If I have overlooked a difference in the two requests, I will be happy to
>> be informed of the differences.
>>
>> There may be valid reasons for allowing one request, and not another, but in
>> your mail, it initially appeared to me as if the difference was your
>> confidence
>> in the developers. I don't see that as a valid reason (although I trust your
>> judgement).
>>
>> After re-reading the mail, I can see that your confidence was mentioned to
>> assure us
>> that they would not start commiting to areas they were not supposed to.
>>
>> As for favorism, I don't see anyone else having the privileges that you are
>> requesting
>> for the proposed contributors. And I can't see how anyone else could apply
>> for something
>> like it. As always, I'm gladly corrected.
>>
>> There may also be a misunderstanding about what an "SVN Sandbox" is supposed
>> to be or do.
>> I have my idea of a sandbox from OpenLayers:
>> http://faq.openlayers.org/svn/how-can-i-get-commit-access-to-the-svn-repository/
>>
>> In the OL sense, a sandbox is a free-for-all playground, where anyone can
>> get access.
>> I am under the impressions that this is  possible in MapGuide too, so there
>> is no
>> need to vote on this issue, we should just set it up, free for all.
>>
>> If I misunderstood that part, I would also be happy to be informed.
>>
>> Having a sandbox would potentially open up for many more developers, and
>> make
>> stuff like reviews of specific cases better.
>>
>> I vote -0.
>> I want the developers on board, but I
>> don't like the method.
>>
>> Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom Fukushima skrev:
>>>
>>> Kenneth,
>>>
>>> Wow,  I'm sorry if I'm being dense, but I really don't know where this
>>> favoritism feeling is coming from.
>>>
>>> Let me back up a bit... MGOS doesn't have a process for the sandbox, and
>>> so I thought I was doing the right thing by making sure to ask the PSC for
>>> the rights to the sandbox for some developers.  So yes, we need to vote or
>>> do something. What did I do wrong to get so much concern about this request?
>>> Please tell me, I would like to know? Should I just tell the developers that
>>> they should forget this approach?
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>> [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Kenneth
>>> Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 11:49 AM
>>> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to
>>> work in a sandbox
>>>
>>> If I understand Frank correctly, it is "easy" to create a sandbox in svn.
>>> With this sandbox anyone (in theory) should be allowed a sandbox area,
>>> for free play and testing.
>>>
>>> If this is so, I don't see the need for this vote.
>>> I think UV would like a sandbox as well.
>>>
>>> The open source handbook:
>>> http://producingoss.com/
>>>
>>> clearly states that the founding company should not try to bypass the
>>> rules, as that will make the project appear "closed" in the sense that
>>> only "insiders" get commit access, which is the opposite of the goal
>>> with OS software.
>>>
>>> I'm not suggesting that there is foul play here, and I am confident that
>>> the proposed developers are highly skilled, but seen from the outside,
>>> this looks a bit like favorizing the Autodesk people.
>>>
>>> I would suggest that we instead clear up any confusion on the sandbox
>>> issues,
>>> and make sandboxes avalible for those who apply for one.
>>> If there are too many requests for sandboxes, we will have to reconsider
>>> what criteria there should be for applicants.
>>>
>>> Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Fukushima skrev:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi PSC,
>>>>
>>>> I have three developers who will be working in a MGOS sandbox branch that
>>>> I will be creating for them.  I don't want to be submitting all of their
>>>> patches for them and would prefer if they could commit directly to this
>>>> branch.  Unfortunately, I believe that we can only give submit rights to all
>>>> or none of our subversion tree. So can we give subversion access to these
>>>> developers on the condition that they work only in the sandbox?
>>>>
>>>> These developers are
>>>> Hugues Wisniewski
>>>> Jon Curtis
>>>> Norm Olsen
>>>>
>>>> They are all senior Autodesk developers with many many years of
>>>> development experience.  I myself would be fine with giving them access to
>>>> the full tree, but let's leave that for another discussion.
>>>>
>>>> I move to give Hugues, Jon and Norm, commit rights to a branch in the
>>>> sandbox/adsk area.
>>>>
>>>> +1 Tom
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Tom
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>>> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com
> +61 405 847 168
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

-- 
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com
+61 405 847 168
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals