KSL: moving forward

[Patrick Wright]

Hi Jon

I don't have any say in all of this, but I think that bringing
together the various experiments people are working on for the
compiler would be a good thing.

I'm wondering if you can clarify the text on the KSL homepage,
specifically this section, under "code reviews":
"Request a code review by sending your patch to the compiler-dev
mailing list. The code must be reviewed by an experienced compiler
engineer/hacker before being committed to the **trunk**. Currently,
this mostly means a current or former Sun employee that has worked on
javac.

When the reviewer approves your changes, you can commit them to the
**branch**. The reviewer will reply something similar to I approve
these changes so you know when the reviewer is satisfied with the
quality of the code. Do not commit anything until you are sure the
reviewer approves your changes. If in doubt, do not hesitate to ask."

(stars added for emphasis). Is it a mistake that the first paragraph
refers to trunk and the second to a branch?

What's not clear to me is whether KSL is really a "kitchen sink" for
ideas on changes to the compiler (or usually, to the language), or
more specifically a place for compiler experts to propose almost-ready
changes or bug fixes for the KSL trunk (which I would consider a more
serious effort).

I'm wondering if there is a way that KSL could include (and encourage)
wild and wooly (but working) experiments with the language/compiler
while also preserving an area with a higher standard for inclusion.
Perhaps that's the difference between branch (experimental) and trunk
(serious) here.

SwingLabs has the idea of an incubator, which is a space which any
SCA-signer can commit to, but which doesn't guarantee inclusion into
SwingLabs. It is a way to encourage people to contribute ideas as they
develop them.


Thanks
Patrick