Subject: Re: open source process issue
From: "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 14:04:45 -0400

Christian, Brian:

I think it's worth noting that the review level that's appropriate depends
on what you are trying to achieve. For the EROS project, we are
exceptionally concerned about assuring the code when we are done. Any
significant change to the core system -- even one by me -- is discussed on
the mailing list first. I have learned from several exceptions that this is
a good idea, because I've had to back a lot of things out that turned out
not to work for some perfectly straightforward reason.

Of course, we haven't yet reached the point where we get any significant
number of patches from third parties, and it remains to be seen how we will
manage this when it happens.

My thought, perhaps relevant to your discussion, is that a high-assurance
result really does need a group that makes the decisions about what will be
accepted into the code base. We will never simply accept patches without
close review. I have no problem if people want to start a divergent effort,
but for our project the need for robustness outweighs the need for urgent
acceptance. For some users this won't be the right optimization.

I suppose what I'm trying to say is that when it comes to software process,
there simply isn't a "one size fits all" solution.