Harvesting Process is not working

ducasse ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Mon Nov 3 07:20:15 UTC 2003


>
> It's frustrating for me to feel like I have the responsibility to
> review a changeset when I don't have the authority to put that
> changeset into the image myself.

Hi adam

I think that there are several points to consider:
	- first if you review a changeset and say that this is well implemented
	fix a real problem, works well, then the harvester (the guy that has 
the responsibility
	not to break the system) will just have a quick look and this will be 
done

	- second there is a question of trust. I would not like to have a 
system in which
	any people can add something that can break the rest. Believe working 
on KCP
	is sometimes getting on the nerves.

So I think that marcus wanted to say that we need
	- more people to give their point of view
	- more harvester in specific domain: network, Morphic, concurrency,...


> And I *do* feel like I have that responsibility, because I felt
> guilty just now when Marcus asked us how we can possibly expect the
> harvesting process to work if we submit changesets but don't help
> with the reviewing.
>
> I think that the answer to his question, though, is that the way it
> *should* work is that when someone submits a changeset affecting
> the Wobulator package, the owners (stewards?) of the Wobulator
> package should be the ones responsible for reviewing it - because
> those are the people who have the authority to get it into the
> official Wobulator distribution. I haven't reviewed any
> non-Celeste-related changesets in a long time, but I try to catch
> all the Celeste-related ones.
>
> This is why I've been doing the package-removal work, but there's
> no reason why we can't do this for code that's still in the image
> (as long as the guides/harvesters/whoever are willing to let a
> package's steward mark changesets related to that package as
> [APPROVED]). Isn't that why we were looking for stewards?

But I would dream about that but we need a good package dependencies 
mechanism
before doing that frankly. We should be able to say Squeak 3.7 is built 
from xxx7 vv3 bb3.1
and so on.

Stef

>
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3088
>
>
> Adam
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
>




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list