[mapguide-psc] RFC process...

[Paul Spencer]

Ok, ok ... I'll keep arguing ... ;)

On 29-Oct-06, at 4:13 PM, Jason Birch wrote:

> This whole discussion is only really relevant for large features/ 
> refactorings.  Small or obvious features (such as adding a new  
> version of WMS support) will likely just be met with a "looks good"  
> on the dev list, and then breeze through the RFC process.

perhaps this meets my concern ... we can include something like the  
text you proposed before but I think it needs to be either preceded  
by the above or modified to be more in line with the above.  What you  
wrote before made it sound like if I tried to develop anything for  
mapguide without first consulting the PSC, I could be in a world of  
hurt :)

This also mostly applies to developers who are not currently  
committers, people who want to hack in a new feature relatively  
quickly and are willing to contribute it but might not even attempt  
after reading your caveats on development.  I want to make it as easy  
and painless as possible for these folks, quality and usefulness of  
the code notwithstanding.

I think we were thinking at different ends of the scale of  
contribution.  I don't expect non-committers to bring in large  
features and refactoring ... the code base is probably too large and  
complex for someone to be able to do something large without talking  
to the dev list ... so we'll know about it before anyway.

Paul

+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Paul Spencer                          pspencer at dmsolutions.ca    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Chief Technology Officer                                         |
|DM Solutions Group Inc                http://www.dmsolutions.ca/ |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+