I think most of the edginess is simply fear of the unknown. Many of the ASF Members, like Greg, have not had the opportunity to interact with the ASF Committers working at Jakarta. Likewise, nearly all of us working at Jakarta have only interacted with a handful of the ASF Members. For good or ill, many of the key management lists at other ASF Projects are restricted, making it difficult for us to learn by example. Happily, this list is starting to fill that gap by documenting some of the missing usuage examples. =:0)
I think the most of the edginess is ignorance or rejection of the known, coupled with the most pessimistic possible assumptions of anything that is unknown.
How many folks have read the foundation pages at http://www.apache.org/ before joining a project? The bylaws and public records of ASF? Read about other ASF projects? Learned what it is they're getting involved with? Googled a bit to find out how ASF interacts with the world? Or to see how and why other projects in the past have failed or succeeded?
how many know they are supposed to? Googling is the solution? humm. Perhaps the most famous and capable web development organization should come up with a better method of organizing its web content than "go search on google for what it means to be part of the ASF"...
Why would one expect people to read everything yet to be written down when it seems they have not read or want to read what is already written down?
Perhaps the bylaws are insuffiently disseminated. Sure its on the web... Sure its on the apache site...but have you read EVERYTHING on the apache site? OR do you read what you look for or what strikes you in the face immediately as being important. A basic rule of "send this link with this set of 'read this at minimum' to all committers" seems more sensible.
For instance, I'd like very much to link the text version of the committer for to the jakarta webized version. I hear its not on the web but its in CVS... I have absolutely freaking no idea where.. . Sure its there...but a needle in the haystack.
I believe most of us are very eager to learn. Like many good developers, we are not eager to reinvent the wheel. Frameworks are a favorite topic at Jakarta, and I'm sure virtually all of us are ready, willing, and able to adopt the ASF framework. It's just most of us are still learning how the ASF architecture is suppose to work.
On the contrary, I see the wheel being reinvented right here, right now. See the subject of this email. I think that is because people either don't want to know, or know and wish to ignore anything that doesn't agree with how they think things should work.
I disagree. This evolved from a desire for greater openness in the ASF and a more inclusive framework. Perhaps people such as Sam already see themselves as viable members capable of evolving the process and are working out new ideas. Perhaps he feels the ASF should be more open and is working to improve upon it and is already familiar with the existing system.
Why is it that the issue is framed as ASF needing to learn about Jakarta, instead of as Jakarta needing to learn about the rest of the world and its history? Is it possible to see that the perception may well be that the community of committers that has arisen at Jakarta wants to know about nothing other than itself?
Perhaps that is not the most enlightened statement I've heard. Perhaps statements like this lead to disenfranchisement and make those Jakarta committers feel that way. Especially since you're attacking (I think) the very group whom have come here to try and bridge the gaps.
-Andy
Chuck
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
