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

Fri Jun 26 08:42:00 EDT 2009

Thanks for the clarifcation.

-----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: Friday, June 26, 2009 6:22 AM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to work in a sandbox

You are correct, neither of us can decide rules for the sandbox alone.
You are correct that the sandboxes are not set up, but Frank mentioned that
support for it was ready technically.
I think we, the PSC, should define the sandbox rules right away.

I voted -0, because I do not want to block this, but I think the MapGuide
project would benefit more from a general sandbox implementation.

Of course, one does not exclude the other, but having an actual use for
a sandbox would likely increase the commitment for getting it ready.

Using an open sandbox model would also completely remove any
speculation about favorizing, should there be any.

Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S

Tom Fukushima skrev:
> Sorry, on rereading, the last comment about the vote should not have been written, please disregard it if you can.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Tom Fukushima
> Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 6:02 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: RE: [mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to work in a sandbox
>
> Kenneth,
>
> Let me reiterate.  We don't have a process for the sandbox, until we define the process for setting up sandboxes especially since we have not set up subversion so that sandbox users cannot submit to the mainstream; and how it can be used, etc, I (nor you) cannot go and make arbitrary decisions about it.  If I did, I think that would be unfair.
>
> I don't think that the definition of a sandbox is in question.  It is a place to "play".
>
> I am not aware of a request from UV for a sandbox; I don't know why we would reject such a request actually.  
>
> Honestly, your vote of -0 makes me feel less positive about this project.  
>
> Tom
>
> -----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: Friday, June 26, 2009 12:47 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Motion: Give developers commit rights to work in a sandbox
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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