[TYPO3-core] RFC: Hook request in t3lib_tceforms

[Ingmar Schlecht]

Full ACK!

cheers
Ingmar

Thorsten Kahler schrieb:
> Hi Ingmar,
> 
> Ingmar Schlecht wrote on 15.02.2007 11:31:
>>> AFAIR the last discussion on the core list had the conclusion that a RC
>>>  means a new branch. I support this.
>> You probably missed the discussion in the thread "4.1 - How far are we?" 
>> about whether to create the 4.1 branch with the release of the RC1 or 
>> with the release of 4.1 final. I share Stucki's view there.
> 
> 
> I didn't miss it but I also didn't have it in mind when I wrote the above.
> Maybe someone else someday might not have it in mind when committing a change.
> 
> What does that mean for our team?
> a) I'm too oblivious for the team
> b) Comments in a thread longer that's too long to fit on a screen can't be
> the guideline for the team
> 
> If it's either one of the above IMHO it's better to tend to the "technically
> correct" way mentioned by Stucki.
> 
>>> I think there's no discussion about following points: - A RC means a
>>> feature freeze. - A feature freeze does allow no changes but bug fixes.
>>>
>> The feature freeze before a minor version means no changes except for 
>> bugfixes and hooks.
> 
>> Yet, new hooks are not allowed for patchlevel version.
> 
> 
> Agreed, hooks might get in after the feature freeze but not after the
> release of the final minor version. I didn't have Ingos fine argumentation
> at hand when I wrote my post (while on the train).
> 
>>> - No new features but only bug fixes can get into a branch.
>> ...which doesn't apply for hooks if they're added before a final minor 
>> version.
> 
> Yep, see above.
> 
>>> What's the result of this? If we have a RC _without_ a branch, it's not
>>> allowed to do any other changes on trunk than in a branch. So there's
>>> no difference between the trunk and a branch. And we have the absurd
>>> situation of the trunk being a branch.
>> Exactly. There's no problem with that, as discussions about new features 
>> should be held back until 4.1 final is released, so we need no "trunk" 
>> (in the original sense) during the RC phase.
> 
>>> Ergo: RC => feature freeze => branch
>> See above.
> 
> 
> IMHO it's not only technically correct but it also might support developers
> to commit to the correct branch / trunk depending on the kind of change. And
> it's easier to merge bug fixes from a branch to the trunk (or commit them to
> both as it should be our daily practice) than to remove new features from
> the trunk and introduce them again after a later branch.
> 
>>> [snip]
>> I wouldn't object to adding that to the core team guide, yet hooks should
>> be explicitly allowed until final.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> Anyway, I think that a majority vote or sensible arguments of the release
>> management can in any case make exceptions to what's written in the core
>> team guide, as sometimes special cases might not be covered properly.
> 
> 
> I think the whole discussion is about our "default procedure" albeit special
> cases.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Thorsten