We all spend our free time on this, so yeah, I feel your pain. > [Tx:] and forked it on your own
Yes, DVC. > You gave access to non-committers Not yet, I haven't, no. I'm still trying to discuss it publicly on this mailing list, looking for a yes. Although, you must understand that I'm interested in increased cooperation in .Net/other language OSS ecosystems and this happens by including people. Not by excluding them. And see now, we might actually have excellent programmers helping us create a great project! It's a win-win situation, hammett. > You also created another project under the castle umbrella under the castle > umbrella > without our consent and control it under your own repos Yes, Castle.Facilities.NHibernate. But I'm not asking to have that included on the main site. There's a thread on that project. If you search the history of this mailing list you will find that it's not the case for another project. > You're a valuable contributor and I appreciate your domain expertise > on these spaces, but these discussions are everything but productive. I think they are very productive, we discuss things. I think you need to start cooperating better with contributors and stop scaring them off - work to get people active and interested in contributing instead of having hierarchies and lack of trust. > That said, if you want to continue to be under the castle umbrella > then you'll have to invest time to make your valid points and persuade > people on why you think your proposal/idea/suggestion are right, and > by that I mean that "Further, I haven't agreed to it." isn't really > effective. You are correct; I think we are two very different types (or too similar) types of people who have different cultural preferences on how and in what manner discussions and decisions are to be made. I consider it your responsibility to ask me (just CC me if I *need* to reply to an e-mail) if you are making changes to a project which I write code for. You can do this on github, skype or e-mail. If you make decisions about projects that I write code for without asking me, then that's a problem and not good leadership. It will cause threads like this to surface. > Our project bylaws define that we need majority approval, not > everybody's approval. You don't have this from this thread as far as I can see, unless you mean 'majority of those replying within a time window conveniently selected by myself'. > Finally, I'd be fine reverting this particular merge, provided that > miscommunications like this wont happen again. I'd also like to hear > other input on this topic. That is good news. Perhaps it would be fruitful to have monthly chats over a higher-bandwidth protocol - say Skype, for example? This would be easier to schedule and plan for me. Henrik On Oct 25, 3:39 pm, hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Henrik <[email protected]> wrote: > > That's not a decision, it's a question that I'm answering. I see no > > deadline in that question, to answer, and I have other work to do as > > well than to read every e-mail that you send, in fact. > > That's true for all of us. I've spend most of my saturday to get this done. > > > First of all which I think is the worst actually, is the renaming of > > the repo that invalidates ALL incoming links to it online... Bad for > > search engines, bad for everyone. > > It's been done to make us more effective and we were aware of the drawbacks. > > > Secondly, unless we on top of the 'merge' also work out a method of > > branching and stick to that branching method really well, I might be > > affected by Windsor changes in ways I might not want to be. > > That's up for all of you to discuss with the team and set up. > > > Thirdly, I consider Castle.Transactions as well as Castle.IO top level > > projects on their own, because they should be from a marketing > > perspective as well as that they *are* from a technical perspective. > > If you want to put AutoTx as a facility to Windsor; I'm fine with that > > -- it depends on Windsor, but Castle.IO and Castle.Transactions don't > > have any dependencies on Windsor and I'm even thinking about removing > > the dependency on Castle.Core (fully doable). > > Fourthly, marketing again, it would look better to have these as > > separate repositories. > > Fithly, if you merge them like that you are also forced to give access > > to non-castle committers; Seb and Roy which are to have access to the > > Castle.IO project - you haven't agreed to this, but it would be the > > case for the IO project which I control, as opposed to the Windsor > > project which is "less mine". > > Well, I'm may be missing the point here. You took over > Castle.Transaction and forked it on your own. You gave access to > non-committers, and you asked it to be included in the merge two days > ago. You also created another project under the castle umbrella > without our consent and control it under your own repos - at the same > time you want the home page to link to it... > > I'm not sure of what to make of all of this, but my suggestion is that > if you want to have full control over your projects, then make them > your project and cut the link. > > You're a valuable contributor and I appreciate your domain expertise > on these spaces, but these discussions are everything but productive. > > That said, if you want to continue to be under the castle umbrella > then you'll have to invest time to make your valid points and persuade > people on why you think your proposal/idea/suggestion are right, and > by that I mean that "Further, I haven't agreed to it." isn't really > effective. > > Finally, I'd be fine reverting this particular merge, provided that > miscommunications like this wont happen again. I'd also like to hear > other input on this topic. > > > Further, it makes for larger downloads from git which I might not want > > to have my users go through. > > Further, I haven't agreed to it. > > Our project bylaws define that we need majority approval, not > everybody's approval. > > -- > Cheers, > hammetthttp://hammett.castleproject.org/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
