Re: Scala and WebObjects
Re: Scala and WebObjects
- Subject: Re: Scala and WebObjects
- From: Henrique Prange <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:10:27 -0200
Hi Pascal,
On 11/11/2010, at 10:34, Pascal Robert wrote:
>
> Le 2010-11-11 à 07:21, Anjo Krank a écrit :
>
>>> I have a question that I kept to myself for months, but let's go public. People talks about moving away from WO or even writing WO/EOF replacements. But AFAIK, Wonder shows that we can extend the core frameworks a lot.
>>
>> The core problem being that "we" means a very, very tiny amount of people. Basically, it means "I" have to fix stuff that "I" want done. While it's nice to be able to do that, it's hardly economic. I really can't remember the last time I had someone else solve a problem for me (not counting Mike fixing up the IDE).
>
> Indeed, that's part of the problem. But in the last year, we did have more committers. And from the comments we get from the surveys, I got a couple of people who said that the Wonder "process" is not open enough. Using Github is an option for that. Having more committers is another one.
>
AFAIR, I'm one that said something in this direction. And I can't see how a DVCS or more people is the solution for this problem. IMHO, Wonder process lacks communication. Usually Wonder decisions (even dramatic ones) are made by one committer. There is no planning, no discussion.
More people using a DVCS would just promote the "solution to solve my own problem" mantra.
Cheers,
Henrique
PS.: I'm not against moving Wonder to a DVCS. I'm against moving Wonder to a DVSC without an open discussion.
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden