OpenSC and gerrit

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
61 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

OpenSC and gerrit

Ludovic Rousseau
Hello,

I finally succeeded in rebasing and approving some patched in the
backlog. I still do not understand everything. I subscribed to the
OpenSC project on gerrit so I should receive a email for any submitted
patch.

I also added Viktor Tarasov as a member of the Integrators group.
Viktor, you should be able to approve patches now.

The link between https://www.opensc-project.org/codereview/p/OpenSC
and https://github.com/OpenSC/OpenSC is broken or non functional. I
hope Martin can fix it so it works as described in
https://www.opensc-project.org/opensc/wiki/SourceCode

Thanks to Peter for his time helping me with git.

Regards,

--
 Dr. Ludovic Rousseau
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
Le vendredi 16 mars 2012 à 23:36 +0100, Ludovic Rousseau a écrit :
> I finally succeeded in rebasing and approving some patched in the
> backlog. I still do not understand everything. I subscribed to the
> OpenSC project on gerrit so I should receive a email for any submitted
> patch.
>
> I also added Viktor Tarasov as a member of the Integrators group.
> Viktor, you should be able to approve patches now.

Thanks a lot for your work and adding Viktor in the group.
--
                  Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Viktor Tarasov-3
Le 17/03/2012 19:13, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE a écrit :
> Le vendredi 16 mars 2012 à 23:36 +0100, Ludovic Rousseau a écrit :
>> I finally succeeded in rebasing and approving some patched in the
>> backlog. I still do not understand everything. I subscribed to the
>> OpenSC project on gerrit so I should receive a email for any submitted
>> patch.
>>
>> I also added Viktor Tarasov as a member of the Integrators group.
>> Viktor, you should be able to approve patches now.
> Thanks a lot for your work and adding Viktor in the group.

Thanks.

Gerrit still has replication problem -- 'staging' of OpenSC/OpenSC.git do not updated by merges of Gerrit's repository.
Certainly, gerrit is nice tool to play with, but, without replication it looses much of it's utility.

More important, from my point of view, is jenkins.
Somebody has to administrate jenkins to extend the existing jobs, create the new ones and include the build of Linux packages in continuous manner.
Anybody can do it? I do not have such rights.

That's why I still propose to temporarily use the alternatives jenkins & gerrit.
Both were tested with 'staging' of OpenSC and 'secure-messaging' of OpenSC-SM on Debian, Win32 and Win64.
With the graceful cooperation of Jean-Michel this jenkins should include the MacOS and other slaves and to build the linux packages.

Kind regards,
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Peter Stuge-4
Viktor Tarasov wrote:
> I still propose to temporarily use the alternatives jenkins & gerrit.

It's IMO really stupid to fork anything, regardless if it is code or
infrastructure.


//Peter
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Viktor Tarasov-3
Le 17/03/2012 22:03, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Viktor Tarasov wrote:
>> I still propose to temporarily use the alternatives jenkins & gerrit.
> It's IMO really stupid to fork anything, regardless if it is code or
> infrastructure.

You are amazedly brief.

Could you explain here how can we 'move forward',
preferably without appealing to the absent persons and to the non-working services?


>
> //Peter
> _______________________________________________
> opensc-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
>

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Peter Stuge-4
Viktor Tarasov wrote:
> Could you explain here how can we 'move forward', preferably
> without appealing to the absent persons and to the non-working
> services?

No, a "move forward" idea is broken from the start.

Be specific. What is it that does not currently work and which is
critical for developing perfect commits? I posit nothing.


//Peter
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Viktor Tarasov-3
Le 17/03/2012 22:32, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Viktor Tarasov wrote:
>> Could you explain here how can we 'move forward', preferably
>> without appealing to the absent persons and to the non-working
>> services?
> No, a "move forward" idea is broken from the start.
>
> Be specific. What is it that does not currently work and which is
> critical for developing perfect commits? I posit nothing.

Probably you have not read my mail.

- replication in gerrit do not working.
Should we manually push the perfect commits from gerrit's repo to staging?
(In the github's pull requests the commits are also perfects, almost perfect.)

- nobody from the active persons has an admin access to jenkins -- no possibility to extend the current jobs, create the new ones
and to build linux packages in continuous manner.

For these two points there is no visibility on when they could be resolved.
This situation is lasting for months.

Personally I would prefer to develop the OpenSC's card middleware, but in the current situation do not see the possibility.
That's why I'm spending my time to get knowledge of jenkins and gerrit and to install an alternative way of 'moving forward'.


> //Peter

Kind regards,
Viktor.
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Peter Stuge-4
Viktor Tarasov wrote:
> > What is it that does not currently work and which is
> > critical for developing perfect commits?
..
> - replication in gerrit

If you mean the mirroring of commits to github.com I don't see how
that is critical. Work with the repo in gerrit instead. Many projects
have no other.


> Should we manually push the perfect commits from gerrit's repo to
> staging?

Define staging? It's not at all clear which repository you refer to.
The staging branch in gerrit's repo gets updated when changes are
submitted in gerrit.


> - nobody from the active persons has an admin access to jenkins --
> no possibility to extend the current jobs, create the new ones
> and to build linux packages in continuous manner.

I also don't see how jenkins is critical.


//Peter
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Alon Bar-Lev
Hello Peter,

I wrote this before, but I think I need to write again...
I think you are trying to make opensc something it is not.
The bureaucracy and lack of flexibility will inhibit contributions and
healthy *SMALL* community.
That's true that it may eventually lead to more stable implementation,
but the cost may be lack of progress, thus not able to achieve the
stability goal as well.

Until now I did not notice gerrit to be so good solution that all
other methods should be dropped for of it.

However, a proper build server with multiple platforms and
configurations is something that is vary useful to have in order to
test branches before merging.

I quite miss the previous method in which people could work on this
project progressing (and may do mistakes), but invest their time in
proactive way.

I don't think that in current process I [or anyone similar] could have
contributed whatever I've done before, so I don't think it is going to
a good place.

Alon.

On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Peter Stuge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Viktor Tarasov wrote:
>> > What is it that does not currently work and which is
>> > critical for developing perfect commits?
> ..
>> - replication in gerrit
>
> If you mean the mirroring of commits to github.com I don't see how
> that is critical. Work with the repo in gerrit instead. Many projects
> have no other.
>
>
>> Should we manually push the perfect commits from gerrit's repo to
>> staging?
>
> Define staging? It's not at all clear which repository you refer to.
> The staging branch in gerrit's repo gets updated when changes are
> submitted in gerrit.
>
>
>> - nobody from the active persons has an admin access to jenkins --
>> no possibility to extend the current jobs, create the new ones
>> and to build linux packages in continuous manner.
>
> I also don't see how jenkins is critical.
>
>
> //Peter
> _______________________________________________
> opensc-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Peter Stuge-4
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> I think you are trying to make opensc something it is not.

I am not trying to do a single thing beyond pointing out that there
is alot of complaints and wasted time over no *actual* problem.


> The bureaucracy and lack of flexibility will inhibit contributions
> and healthy *SMALL* community.

What bureaucracy do you mean? Requiring no build failure and review
in gerrit? I think those are acceptable requirements. They're also
not exactly unique for OpenSC.

What lack of flexibility do you mean? Anyone in the whole world can
clone the gerrit repo, make changes, and push them back to gerrit for
review.


> That's true that it may eventually lead to more stable
> implementation, but the cost may be lack of progress,
> thus not able to achieve the stability goal as well.

Quantity is IMO completely irrelevant without quality.


> Until now I did not notice gerrit to be so good solution
> that all other methods should be dropped for of it.

I'm afraid I don't understand what exactly you mean by this. Gerrit
helps track patches. I'm not sure that the current configuration is
completely ideal, but it is also not in any way causing a critical
problem for further development.


> However, a proper build server with multiple platforms and
> configurations is something that is vary useful to have in
> order to test branches before merging.

Of course there is no replacement for testing, but I really can not
agree if you are arguing that being unable to extend jenkins is a
critical problem for further development.


> I quite miss the previous method in which people could work on this
> project progressing (and may do mistakes), but invest their time in
> proactive way.

What is stopping that? Please be specific.


> I don't think that in current process I [or anyone similar] could have
> contributed whatever I've done before, so I don't think it is going to
> a good place.

Why not? Please be specific.


//Peter
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
Dear Peter,

> > The bureaucracy and lack of flexibility will inhibit contributions
> > and healthy *SMALL* community.
>
> What bureaucracy do you mean? Requiring no build failure and review
> in gerrit? I think those are acceptable requirements. They're also
> not exactly unique for OpenSC.

Come on! This is obvious. When we mean "bureaucracy", we mean a small
group of people trying to privatize OpenSC.

When the project was handed over a few months ago, there was no
election.

OpenSC copyright does not belong to you but to the group of people who
wrote it. You have to right to stop us from developing OpenSC, making
commits or publishing packages.


Kind regards,
--
                  Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
In reply to this post by Peter Stuge-4
The message was sent before it was written. Correcting it:

****

Dear Peter,

> > The bureaucracy and lack of flexibility will inhibit contributions
> > and healthy *SMALL* community.
>
> What bureaucracy do you mean? Requiring no build failure and review
> in gerrit? I think those are acceptable requirements. They're also
> not exactly unique for OpenSC.

Come on! This is obvious. When we mean "bureaucracy", we mean a small
group of people trying to privatize OpenSC.

OpenSC copyright belongs to the group of people who wrote OpenSC,
which is all of us. It does not belong to any company and an individual
granting rights to other individuals.

To be more precise:

Peter, Ludovic and Martin do not have any legal right to establish
rules over OpenSC project. Especially if these rules go
in the direction of more bureaucracy. We have to accept collaboration
whenever possible.

If you still don't understand, we will go over an election process.

Kind regards,
--
                  Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu


_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Martin Paljak-4
In reply to this post by Viktor Tarasov-3
Hello,

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 23:01, Viktor Tarasov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Gerrit still has replication problem -- 'staging' of OpenSC/OpenSC.git do not updated by merges of Gerrit's repository.
> Certainly, gerrit is nice tool to play with, but, without replication it looses much of it's utility.

This was due to the "ruby github ssh" issue [1], after what all
pubkeys were suspended on Github and needed validation.
So was the key that did the syncing disabled. As the repostiroy did
not seem to be out of sync, I assumed that the keys are still OK and
re-enabled them. That should also bring the sync back (will verify).


[1] https://github.com/blog/1068-public-key-security-vulnerability-and-mitigation

Martin
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Alon Bar-Lev
In reply to this post by Peter Stuge-4
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Peter Stuge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> > I think you are trying to make opensc something it is not.
>
> I am not trying to do a single thing beyond pointing out that there
> is alot of complaints and wasted time over no *actual* problem.

First I want to write that I have no intention to manage this project,
just to provide my own view regarding the process.

The fact that I fail to present my argument so you understand is my
own failure. I have no words beyond what I already wrote, but I will
try again.

>
> > The bureaucracy and lack of flexibility will inhibit contributions
> > and healthy *SMALL* community.
>
> What bureaucracy do you mean? Requiring no build failure and review
> in gerrit? I think those are acceptable requirements. They're also
> not exactly unique for OpenSC.

Yes. That's exactly what I mean. Sure it is not exactly unique for
OpenSC, just that you compare it to different kind of dynamics,
different stability requirement and different amount of available
resources.

> What lack of flexibility do you mean? Anyone in the whole world can
> clone the gerrit repo, make changes, and push them back to gerrit for
> review.

Right, then wait 3 months in order to have his changes reviewed and
discussed, and only then continue, while doing about 10 times rebase
and fix his 3 months old patch set.

Look, the model should be entirely different for small projects
without much resources, something that is more similar to what we had
before.

There are 3, 4 or 5 core developers, they can do whatever they like,
commit, revert, fix - anything.
Each commit is sent to the mailing list, so peers and guests can
review changes and comment. As result of this post review, these
people who are the trusted by the community and trust each other may
progress much faster, even in the price of committing not-the-best
solutions, while cooperating together based on each own free resources
to achieve the-best solutions.

Until now guests sent patches to mailing list for review, there was
always the chance that the core developers missed specific patch or
had no interest at that point in time. These patches were lost if the
author did not resend it over and over until he got acknowledgment.

The guests' process can be replaced by the gerrit solution, which is
superior. Instead of sending patches to mailing list use the gerrit
interface to keep track and review. This is a great improvement, which
is unrelated to core developers process.

What I basically saying is that in utopia you may be right, however,
the reality requires flexibility, especially when the numbers are low
(core developers, community size, allocated resources).

> > That's true that it may eventually lead to more stable
> > implementation, but the cost may be lack of progress,
> > thus not able to achieve the stability goal as well.
>
> Quantity is IMO completely irrelevant without quality.

Again, reality showed different behavior...
There was a different process which worked and produced no less
quality in releases.

What the "new" process provides is a stable branch [most chances] at
every given time - this is its advantage and is suitable for software
that should be released in very short cycles, this is not the case of
this project.

> > Until now I did not notice gerrit to be so good solution
> > that all other methods should be dropped for of it.
>
> I'm afraid I don't understand what exactly you mean by this. Gerrit
> helps track patches. I'm not sure that the current configuration is
> completely ideal, but it is also not in any way causing a critical
> problem for further development.

No, I meant there are other alternatives and solution for software
development. gerrit way (or patch way) is one of them. I don't rule
out the others just because the current trend of developing the Linux
kernel uses one.

> > However, a proper build server with multiple platforms and
> > configurations is something that is vary useful to have in
> > order to test branches before merging.
>
> Of course there is no replacement for testing, but I really can not
> agree if you are arguing that being unable to extend jenkins is a
> critical problem for further development.

No, I am arguing that it is more important than the whole patch method
for core developers.

> > I quite miss the previous method in which people could work on this
> > project progressing (and may do mistakes), but invest their time in
> > proactive way.
>
> What is stopping that? Please be specific.

Just look at the history, see how we cooperated in partial solutions,
reaching gradually to complete solution within the tree during periods
of weeks and different developers for separate issues.

> > I don't think that in current process I [or anyone similar] could have
> > contributed whatever I've done before, so I don't think it is going to
> > a good place.
>
> Why not? Please be specific.

I tried to explain above.

As summary, Peter, I think you took software development trend to the
extreme, this trend is far from being the only truth out there. People
tend to be productive in flexible environments. The state of the
OpenSC project is far from benefit from this approach mostly because
of lack of resources.

And even in this extreme world... there are core developers, see how
Linus commits whatever he likes directly into Linux tree without
"proper" review.

I think that core developers (and I am not arguing I am one of them)
should have free access to repository, allowing them to progress the
fastest they can, we (the community) should trust them to fix whatever
issue they may cause, post review their changes and suggest
alternatives. Becoming core developer should be an option for people
who prove their ability, just like Andreas managed this in the past.

Regards,
Alon Bar-Lev.
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
Le mardi 20 mars 2012 à 22:16 +0200, Alon Bar-Lev a écrit :
>
> I think that core developers (and I am not arguing I am one of them)
> should have free access to repository, allowing them to progress the
> fastest they can, we (the community) should trust them to fix whatever
> issue they may cause, post review their changes and suggest
> alternatives.

Thanks for this post.

OpenSC is really a small community relying on trust and it should be
"self-managed".

Now, IMHO:

Martin and Ludovic, can you open the door to a real collaboration and
allow more core developers? As OpenSC is a small community I think it is
preferable to come back to the old organization when the community was
driving itself.

Martin and Ludovic, please confirm on the mailing list each of these:
A. OpenSC is a self driven-community with several core-developers, no
leader/owner.
B. Martin and Ludovic are core developers, not owners of the project.
OpenSC is owned by the community.

Without direct answer, I will be obliged to incorporate a public OpenSC
association in France and ask core developers to join the association.

Kind regards,
--
                  Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Ludovic Rousseau
Le 20 mars 2012 22:03, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> Martin and Ludovic, can you open the door to a real collaboration and
> allow more core developers? As OpenSC is a small community I think it is
> preferable to come back to the old organization when the community was
> driving itself.

OK. What do you propose?
I already added Viktor to gerrit as an integrator (to accept patches).
What can I do next?

> Martin and Ludovic, please confirm on the mailing list each of these:
> A. OpenSC is a self driven-community with several core-developers, no
> leader/owner.
> B. Martin and Ludovic are core developers, not owners of the project.
> OpenSC is owned by the community.

Note that I do not administer any of the OpenSC resources/servers. So
I can't do much.

> Without direct answer, I will be obliged to incorporate a public OpenSC
> association in France and ask core developers to join the association.

And what if core developers to not want to join your association? :-)

Bye

--
 Dr. Ludovic Rousseau
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
Dear all,

> OK. What do you propose?

I propose to incorporate OpenSC as a French association under the loi
1901 law, under a general agreement. There are millions of associations
in France and the government provides a generic paper for incorporation.
I propose to use this paper without modification.

In short:

* All members are equal.
* Everyone can join the association, without filter.
* The executive board and president is elected every year.
* Recognized developers have an all-time right to join the board.  
* We don't need any budget or funding as this is free software.
* I can handle the accounting as this is a bureaucratic issue.
* All information is public and available for download, including
accounting.

Very important : the executive board would agree to let OpenSC
developers organize themselves according to an organization statement.

The organisation statement should be one page, explaining the
development processes, close to Viktor proposal with the flexibility
proposed by Alon. i.e. :

* OpenSC has a stable GIT branch which is the release, an unstable
branch called staging.
* All patches are discussed and committed fast to staging. All
recognized developers can make commits, without any obligation to join
the association, just as in old times.
* Packages on the build farm are released daily to help detecting and
fixing bugs. The quality process comes from flexibility, the fast
release of versions and bug detection.
* We should have date releases, i.e. every two months. The dates are
known in advance, so everyone gets organized for the release.

In short, we want to give the power back to developers and contributors.

> > Martin and Ludovic, please confirm on the mailing list each of
> these:
> > A. OpenSC is a self driven-community with several core-developers,
> no
> > leader/owner.
> > B. Martin and Ludovic are core developers, not owners of the
> project.
> > OpenSC is owned by the community.

> Note that I do not administer any of the OpenSC resources/servers. So
> I can't do much.

I think there is a misunderstanding in the way OpenSC is organized. I
begin to think that Martin considers himself as an owner, not an
administrator.

So I am asking again to you Martin and Ludovic: 1) do you agree the
community to be the owner of OpenSC and 2) do you accept to serve the
community.

Unless you agree that by writing on the mailing list, we are going to
incorporate an association.

> And what if core developers to not want to join your association? :-)

As written previously, to make commit to GIT there will be no obligation
to be part of the association. Everyone is free to contribute to GIT and
submit patches and we'll commit them with great pleasure.

Kind regards,
--
                  Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Douglas E. Engert


On 3/21/2012 5:32 AM, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>> OK. What do you propose?
>
> I propose to incorporate OpenSC as a French association under the loi
> 1901 law, under a general agreement. There are millions of associations
> in France and the government provides a generic paper for incorporation.
> I propose to use this paper without modification.

Before we incorporate, I have a few questions and comments:

  What other open source projects have uses this French loi law?
  Has this helped or hindered their project?

What appears to have happened over the last few months is that Martin
has started to setup a complicated code review system using Git, GitHub,
Gerrit and Jenkins then has not had the time (or lost interest)
to complete the process. At the same time as a number of large changes
have been submitted and are now stalled.

I am assuming that all these systems are running on Martin's computers
somewhere in Estonia and the Web site is on the ISP: Hetzner Online AG
in Germany.

Martin, we have not heard from you on what is going on, and if you can
continue to support the infrastructure and effort needed for this project
and if not, how do we transfer the administrative burden from you to
someone who can handle it.

I see Ludvoic is trying to do the best he can with the access and the
understanding he has of Gerrit. Peter has been of great help with Git
and Gerrit.

Martin, we need to hear from you...


>
> In short:
>
> * All members are equal.
> * Everyone can join the association, without filter.
> * The executive board and president is elected every year.
> * Recognized developers have an all-time right to join the board.
> * We don't need any budget or funding as this is free software.
> * I can handle the accounting as this is a bureaucratic issue.
> * All information is public and available for download, including
> accounting.
>
> Very important : the executive board would agree to let OpenSC
> developers organize themselves according to an organization statement.
>
> The organisation statement should be one page, explaining the
> development processes, close to Viktor proposal with the flexibility
> proposed by Alon. i.e. :
>
> * OpenSC has a stable GIT branch which is the release, an unstable
> branch called staging.
> * All patches are discussed and committed fast to staging. All
> recognized developers can make commits, without any obligation to join
> the association, just as in old times.
> * Packages on the build farm are released daily to help detecting and
> fixing bugs. The quality process comes from flexibility, the fast
> release of versions and bug detection.
> * We should have date releases, i.e. every two months. The dates are
> known in advance, so everyone gets organized for the release.
>
> In short, we want to give the power back to developers and contributors.
>
>>> Martin and Ludovic, please confirm on the mailing list each of
>> these:
>>> A. OpenSC is a self driven-community with several core-developers,
>> no
>>> leader/owner.
>>> B. Martin and Ludovic are core developers, not owners of the
>> project.
>>> OpenSC is owned by the community.
>
>> Note that I do not administer any of the OpenSC resources/servers. So
>> I can't do much.
>
> I think there is a misunderstanding in the way OpenSC is organized. I
> begin to think that Martin considers himself as an owner, not an
> administrator.
>
> So I am asking again to you Martin and Ludovic: 1) do you agree the
> community to be the owner of OpenSC and 2) do you accept to serve the
> community.
>
> Unless you agree that by writing on the mailing list, we are going to
> incorporate an association.
>
>> And what if core developers to not want to join your association? :-)
>
> As written previously, to make commit to GIT there will be no obligation
> to be part of the association. Everyone is free to contribute to GIT and
> submit patches and we'll commit them with great pleasure.
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> opensc-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

--

  Douglas E. Engert  <[hidden email]>
  Argonne National Laboratory
  9700 South Cass Avenue
  Argonne, Illinois  60439
  (630) 252-5444
_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
Le mercredi 21 mars 2012 à 09:21 -0500, Douglas E. Engert a écrit :
> Before we incorporate, I have a few questions and comments:
>   What other open source projects have uses this French loi law?
>   Has this helped or hindered their project?

Video Lan for example, the editor of VLC:
http://www.videolan.org/videolan/

Loi 1901 stands for "Non-profit organization".

Kind regards,
--
                  Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

smime.p7s (8K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OpenSC and gerrit

Peter Stuge-4
In reply to this post by Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE
Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
> Unless you agree that by writing on the mailing list, we are going
> to incorporate an association.

Jean-Michel, as I've said already, please stop the noise and go fork
if that is what you want! I promise I'll stay far away.


//Peter

_______________________________________________
opensc-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel

attachment0 (197 bytes) Download Attachment
1234