Why is my project available on http://drupal.org/project/alexa_widgets?

Just to understand: who committed the code on http://code.google.com/p/alexa4drupal/?

My CVS Applications is not approved, but "Alexa Widgets" is approved.

Alexa Widgets has not been approved, as who created the project already had a CVS account.

That said, it's unfair to create a project using the same code being used for a CVS application before who applied gets approved.
If the code present in http://drupal.org/project/alexa_widgets is different from the code present in #726226: tungt84 [tungt84] or http://code.google.com/p/alexa4drupal/, then I would espect tungt84 is made maintainer of the project created by drupalshrek together drupalshrek.
If the code is the same, then I think drupalshrek should not have access to that project, and tungt84 would get access to it once his CVS application gets accepted.

PS: The status of this issue should be active.

That said, it's unfair to create a project using the same code being used for a CVS application before who applied gets approved.

What actually happened seems to be a little more complicated than that. As far as I can tell, this is what happened:

1) tungt84 made http://code.google.com/p/alexa4drupal/
2) tungt84 used that code and submitted a slightly different module for a CVS application at #726226: tungt84 [tungt84]
3) drupalshrek saw the code at http://code.google.com/p/alexa4drupal/ found no drupal.org project using it, so created a new project using it

So it's not exactly the same code, but it's all code written by tungt84. Has anyone contacted drupalshrek about this? Maybe the best way to resolve this is to turn this issue into a co-maintainer CVS application. drupalshrek has already reviewed the code and found it worthy of drupal.org CVS, so is there any reason to continue repeating that process here?

I am not sure who created the project reviewed the code, nor did he review it like we would have done it for a CVS application.
For sure, I would pass the project to tungt84 without reviewing the code he proposed for his CVS application.

Hello,

I have helpfully been informed by sreynen (http://drupal.org/user/109890) of this thread.

I think I can help: please let me explain the situation.

I am the creator of the page http://drupal.org/project/alexa_widgets

When I created it I was not aware at all that tungt84 was in the process of applying to have CVS access. All I knew was that I had found code outside of Drupal.org which was released with GPL licence which I felt would be useful for Drupal use (well done tungt84!), and decided to add it (or at least a slightly improved version) to the Drupal site, since the owner agreed (based on the licence) that I could do so. I made some changes (on my own PC) to the code, yet after creating the page on Drupal.org I found a bug which I wanted to fix before posting, but I have not yet found time to do it. In the circumstances as I understood them, the owner of the code was OK for me to use it.

I am not particularly bothered about developing this code further, so in principle I'm more than happy to hand back everything to tungt84. I'll take a look at the changes I made (and hopefully upload the version I have made), and let you know more then.

(This is perhaps a lesson for anybody posting GPL code that if they don't want it copied, don't post it as GPL, or if it's part of a CVS application on Drupal to post it with that application and not outside the process.)

@drupalshrek, I think you might have misinterpreted the issue here. It's not a problem that you copied the code (at least, I didn't see anyone suggest that's a problem). It's just a problem that we had two people wanting to create the same project independently, which was confusing. As long as you're both willing to collaborate, I don't think there's a problem.

I agree and understand that there is now probably only 1 problem; the fact that I have the page.

Nonetheless, there is a 2nd problem which I did want to hint at, but now I'll make it more explicit: tungt84 has (unfortunately for him) got himself in his own mess. By tungt84 posting his code elsewhere, he makes it possible for anybody to take it and do what they want with it. If he had not posted it there (even though I understand he was no doubt trying to be as helpful as possible to people who might want it), nor had changed his mind and decided to now host on Drupal.org then this situation would not have arrived.

I have not yet had time to look at the changes I made and whether I want to keep them or not. If I were to decide that I wanted to keep the code (and my changes), and not let tungt84 have the slightest access, then this 2nd problem would become a real pain for tungt84: he could in that instance lose control forever on drupal.org of the code he originally wrote, and would not even be allowed CVS access based on that code, nor be encouraged to create a similar project, since I would already have control of it!

To reassure tungt84; I don't want to keep you away from this code on drupal.org or from changing the http://drupal.org/project/alexa_widgets page! The worst case scenario (realistically) is that I put up my code (when I get time, which in the worst case is not massively quickly), and give tungt84 joint-access (if I decide I want to keep some control of code that I have worked on). In best case, if the changes I have made in my local version are small (and so my personal investment small), I might look to get rid of everything to tungt84 as soon as possible. I need to look to decide where between the best and worst case I lie.

If I were to decide that I wanted to keep the code (and my changes), and not let tungt84 have the slightest access, then this 2nd problem would become a real pain for tungt84: he could in that instance lose control forever on drupal.org of the code he originally wrote, and would not even be allowed CVS access based on that code, nor be encouraged to create a similar project, since I would already have control of it!

@drupalshrek, this is a bit off-topic, but I think it's worth clarifying that Drupal.org doesn't actually have the finders-keepers policy to project ownership you seem to be suggesting. @kiamlaluno already talked about the possibility of you losing control of the project you created:

If the code is the same, then I think drupalshrek should not have access to that project, and tungt84 would get access to it once his CVS application gets accepted.

Also, it's not exactly discouraged to share code outside Drupal.org. Drupal.org is certainly the preferred place to share code, but that's only possible after CVS accounts are approved, and @tungt84 has been waiting almost a year for access. I don't think many would blame him for sharing the code elsewhere in the meantime. The Drupal.org project access processes are being changed right now to allow exactly this kind of sharing of sandbox projects. It's also a Drupal principle:

Collaboration. Drupal development supports open, collaborative information sharing systems and approaches.

Hello everybody,

Please could I appeal for some calm! This is very quickly getting out of hand.

Until a few days ago we were all happily working together trying to do our best for Drupal and each other.

Now only 2 days later, after a simple discovery that our paths were crossing, and a few "you said this", "he said that" posts later, we all seem at each others throats.

Neither tungt84 nor I intended to get in each others way, but we are a bit which will need untangling, and the first step is to assert that that is all that has happened.

Thanks for reading.

Neither tungt84 nor I intended to get in each others way, but we are a bit which will need untangling, and the first step is to assert that that is all that has happened.

Nobody said it was intentional.

Said that, the (hypothetical) situation would be the following:

• tungt84 is applying for a CVS account.
• Some reviews see there is already a project with the same purpose, and report that to tungt84.

As per CVS application requirements, tungt84's application should be rejected because there is already a project with the same purpose. drupalshrek, who created his project from tungt84's code (even if he found it in a different website) would keep his project.
I don't think that such situation should be acceptable on drupal.org. It would be like saying that everybody can take the code from a CVS application that is waiting to be approved (and not yet marked as won't fix), and create a project.

The idea that there is already a project with the same purpose does not in this case apply, since at worst I would give him joint access to the code I put up.

I certainly think that tungt84's CVS application can be judged on the basis of the code he has posted.

The idea that there is already a project with the same purpose does not in this case apply.

I don't see how it should not apply; the base code is the same. It would be like I take Views, and make another project.

There is no doubt that, if somebody should get access, that should be tungt84.

@kiamlaluno, can you clarify which process tungt84's CVS application should follow now? Co-maintainer applications have different requirements for approval. Should it be treated as a co-maintainer application now that co-maintaining is the goal? Or is it still going through the normal process?

If it's co-maintainer, I think the next step is for tungt84 to make a public request in the project issue queue to become a co-maintainer, though maybe that's not necessary since it already happened here. If it's not, I'll be happy to review the most recent code, though that seems a little strange since nearly the same code is already in CVS.

I've been following this issue and I'd like to propose the following as a solution:

Treat tungt84's CVS application as a normal CVS app (the same as you would treat it if it were a brand new project). I looked at the CVS application and it looks like it's ready to go (if not, then there's only minor fixes to be made).

When tungt84's CVS application is approved, tungt84 should replace drupalshrek as the node owner for the alexa_widgets project node, be given commit access to the project, and have drupalshrek's commit access removed.

If tungt84 would like to restore drupalshrek as a committer, that's fine.

In short: we don't have any real guidelines to go by here, so I think we should give preference to the actual author of the code.

As drupalshrek said in #9:

I am not particularly bothered about developing this code further, so in principle I'm more than happy to hand back everything to tungt84

cweagans steps in #22 sound appropriate to me.

This should be closed and #726226: tungt84 [tungt84] should proceed.

#22 is what I had in mind; I am glad to see there is somebody else who agrees with me, and my solution doesn't sound too much brute-force.

tungt84 is now the maintainer of the project.

In post #23, the partial quote gives the wrong impression of the status. What I said in full was:

I am not particularly bothered about developing this code further, so in principle I'm more than happy to hand back everything to tungt84. I'll take a look at the changes I made (and hopefully upload the version I have made), and let you know more then.

I want to make it clear: I have made changes to the code I found outside of drupal.org.

I don't see why I should be thrown out of being responsible for code which I have changed.

Nor do I see why the code which tungt84 has I suppose now fixed (since it otherwise he would not have been approved) should be the basis of this code.

Much of the discussion here seems to assume that I found code version X, and planned to put version X up on drupal.org. No. I found code version X (which was not in a usable state), spent time fixing it and making it what I thought was usable finishing with a version Y. I had not yet put up this code when this whole issue with tungt84 appeared.

I support #22, as said in #16:

As per CVS application requirements, tungt84's application should be rejected because there is already a project with the same purpose. drupalshrek, who created his project from tungt84's code (even if he found it in a different website) would keep his project.

That would not happen, therefore tungt84 should have ownership of the project.

Much of the discussion here seems to assume that I found code version X, and planned to put version X up on drupal.org. No. I found code version X (which was not in a usable state), spent time fixing it and making it what I thought was usable finishing with a version Y. I had not yet put up this code when this whole issue with tungt84 appeared.

If you want to maintain this project, ask tungt84 to grant you CVS access. If you just want to contribute your changes, then submit a patch. If you don't want to contribute, do nothing.