OpenEuphoria

Re: Source changes

• Posted by Bernie Ryan <xotron at bluefrog.co?> Jul 04, 2007
• 604 views

Pete Lomax wrote:
> 
> Juergen Luethje wrote:
> > 
> > Jason Gade wrote:
> > 
> > > I still like the idea of Rob (or some other well-respected member of 
> > > the community) to have a veto option.
> > 
> > I like the idea concerning the veto option, too.
> 
> I was thinking along similar lines.
> 
> There probably *should* be a place where half-baked, undocumented, flakey and
> experimental mods can be submitted, and equally some mechanism to stop such
> ending up unintentionally/by default in the next formal release.
> (I don't CVS/SVN, so if this is how it already works, pls ignore me.)
> 
> I thought about a using a sourceforge forum, but EuWiki seemed better: While
> most discussion should remain on EUforum, set up "Intent to port" page(s), as
> a place for anyone to post a "formal" (and carefully considered) veto. The
> purpose
> is to maintain an apt summary, vs the 84,000 messages in Euforum, to control
> migration of code from "bleeding edge" to "stable".
> 
> A veto can be logged by anyone and for any reason: inadequately documented,
> I need a stable release, this code shows a bug, breaks this bit of legacy
> code,
> etc. You must have a valid (and unique?) reason though, and of course you are
> allowed to delete your veto if you change your mind.
> 
> However that would probably only work if there was a "bleeding edge" version,
> ready-built, like the "overnight builds" I see elsewhere.
> 
> Obviously someone (Rob) needs final say-so over any protracted disagreement.
> 
> Regards,
> Pete


I agree !

Bernie

My files in archive:
WMOTOR, XMOTOR, W32ENGIN, MIXEDLIB, EU_ENGIN, WIN32ERU, WIN32API 

Can be downloaded here:
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/cgi-bin/asearch.exu?dos=on&win=on&lnx=on&gen=on&keywords=bernie+ryan