I choose proposal A.
-----Original Message-----
From: dbix-class-requ...@lists.scsys.co.uk
[mailto:dbix-class-requ...@lists.scsys.co.uk]
Sent: 05 December 2016 11:26
To: dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
Subject: DBIx-Class Digest, Vol 138, Issue 8
Send DBIx-Class mailing list submissions to
dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
dbix-class-requ...@lists.scsys.co.uk
You can reach the person managing the list at
dbix-class-ow...@lists.scsys.co.uk
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of DBIx-Class digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(Leo Lapworth)
2. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(Patrick Meidl)
3. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(Darren Duncan)
4. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(Dagfinn Ilmari Manns?ker )
5. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(David Precious)
6. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(Sam Kington)
7. Re: ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace Control ?
(Paul Mooney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 09:04:01 +0000
From: Leo Lapworth <l...@cuckoo.org>
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: "DBIx::Class user and developer list"
<dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk>
Message-ID:
<ca+rmup5qjx_kemasaheyfpzqdzx0dyz3qyo5ru1e0a90lxs...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Proposal A
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 10:20:25 +0100
From: Patrick Meidl <pme...@ist.ac.at>
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
Message-ID: <20161205092025.gb11...@ist.ac.at>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Proposal A
--
Patrick Meidl, Mag.
Senior Expert Software Engineering
IST - Institute of Science and Technology Austria Am Campus 1
A-3400 Klosterneuburg, Austria
R I21.EG.115 (Building West, BT01)
T +43 2243 9000 1313
E pme...@ist.ac.at
W https://icp.ist.ac.at/search/users/pmeidl
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:27:35 -0800
From: Darren Duncan <dar...@darrenduncan.net>
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: "DBIx::Class user and developer list"
<dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk>
Message-ID: <f7cc3e31-ce7e-47ab-567f-ad5935b78...@darrenduncan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
I choose Proposal A. -- Darren Duncan
On 2016-12-04 10:15 PM, David Golden wrote:
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community
> governance structure proposed by Matt Trout. Decisions about the
> future development of the project, including but not limited to
> stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be
> governed by the community under the same terms. The community will
> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that
> name or a separate name. Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a
new namespace for independent development.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 11:00:07 +0000
From: ilm...@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Manns?ker )
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
Message-ID: <d8jk2bek5e0....@dalvik.ping.uio.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
I vote for Proposal A
David Golden <x...@xdg.me> writes:
> Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading
> the various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC
> list of Oct 3. [1]
>
> It's time to bring this to a conclusion.
>
> Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets
> the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN. While that may be all he
> cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has
> been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.
>
> Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the
> case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the
> proposals at hand:
>
> * Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized
> as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
> where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park
> permissions with an unknown owner".
>
> * The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the
> support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan
> sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.
>
> * Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
> namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the
> mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])
>
> * Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to
> continue development. [3]
>
> * Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the
> community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued
> DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized
> a proposal [4]. In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter
> volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.
>
> * Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as
> "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
> where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class
> fork free of community bias". [5]
>
> Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has
> consistently provided minimal details on his plans, particularly
> regarding succession should he no longer be able to or wish to
> continue development. After Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he
> would clarify by Nov 1 [6]. This target date then slipped to Nov 5
> [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or
> else Thanksgiving [9]. On November 10, in the middle of this sequence
> of delays, I started a private email thread with Peter asking if there
> was anything I could do to help him formalize his proposal, but the
> thread stalled on the Nov 14. On November 26, I received a separate
> private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if needed
> [10]. In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter
> and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of Dec
3.
>
> I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the
> decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and
> because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be
> public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email
> thread in full. [11]
>
> Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the
> future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating,
> openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the
> stakes and situation than the simpler question of "where does the
> DBIx::Class namespace point". What an adversarial fork means for the
> future of the repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module
> ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is undefined and community
> members may wish to consider that in their decision process.
>
> Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias",
> it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the
table.
> Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted outright
> [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has
> provisions for future self amendment. I consider it operative in its
> amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing
> piece being what specific namespaces it governs.
>
> The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official"
> DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or
> by a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and
> ill that comes of that). The community may wish to consider the track
> record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in
> weighing a decision.
>
> As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or
> waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table
> aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe
> further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or
> clearer options for the future of DBIC. It is time for this dispute
> to be resolved so everyone can move forward.
>
> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community
> governance structure proposed by Matt Trout. Decisions about the
> future development of the project, including but not limited to
> stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be
> governed by the community under the same terms. The community will
> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that
> name or a separate name. Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to a
new namespace for independent development.
>
> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he
> transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently
incommunicado (whether by choice,
> accident or death). Decisions about the future development of the
> project, including but not limited to stability policy, new
> development, branching and freezing shall be made at Peter's sole
> discretion. Peter will choose whether/how to continue active
> development of DBIC under that or a separate name. The community,
> under the governance proposal, will choose whether/how to fork DBIC to
> a new namespace for independent development.
>
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B". Other responses, such as "+1"
> or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>
> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>
> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter. I will be sole
> arbiter of any voting irregularities. Once announced, I will transfer
> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>
> Regards,
> David
>
> [1]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-g
> overnance-and-future-development-td7578987.html
> [2]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustaina
> bility-td7579228.html
> [3]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-g
> overnance-and-future-development-tp7578987p7579158.html
> [4]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-concl
> usion-tp7579168p7579175.html
> [5]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherit
> s-the-existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
> [6]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-concl
> usion-tp7579168p7579184.html
> [7]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-concl
> usion-tp7579168p7579208.html
> [8]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-concl
> usion-tp7579168p7579225.html
> [9]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp75792
> 48p7579250.html [10]
> https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
> [11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
> [12]
> http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-concl
> usion-td7579168.html
--
- Twitter seems more influential [than blogs] in the 'gets reported in
the mainstream press' sense at least. - Matt McLeod
- That'd be because the content of a tweet is easier to condense down
to a mainstream media article. - Calle Dybedahl
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 11:03:57 +0000
From: David Precious <dav...@preshweb.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
Message-ID: <20161205110357.113780d1@cloudburst>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 01:15:04 -0500
David Golden <x...@xdg.me> wrote:
> It's time to bring this to a conclusion.
Amen :)
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B". Other responses, such as "+1"
> or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
Proposal A gets my vote.
Thank you for all your work, David.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 11:18:55 +0000
From: Sam Kington <s...@illuminated.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: "DBIx::Class user and developer list"
<dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk>
Message-ID: <cbd6fb61-5b34-4e96-94e3-133b34df6...@illuminated.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B". Other responses, such as "+1" or "me,
too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
Proposal A.
Sam
--
Website: http://www.illuminated.co.uk/
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 11:26:21 +0000
From: Paul Mooney <paul.moo...@phymatics.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] ? VOTE NOW: DBIC Governance and Namespace
Control ?
To: "DBIx::Class user and developer list"
<dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk>
Message-ID: <5c67d489e525fed849c3de8da1859...@phymatics.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
I vote for Proposal A
On 05.12.2016 06:15, David Golden wrote:
> Thank you to everyone who has been participating in or just reading
> the various governance discussions since my initial email to the DBIC
> list of Oct 3. [1]
>
> It's time to bring this to a conclusion.
>
> Peter suggests that the question to consider is merely which fork gets
> the "DBIx::Class" namespace indexed on CPAN. While that may be all he
> cares about, I feel it trivializes the discussions the community has
> been having and the decision the community is being asked to make.
>
> Without restating all the history to date, here are the facts of the
> case that I think are most relevant to consider in understanding the
> proposals at hand:
>
> * Peter's original plan that started the dispute could be summarized
> as "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
> where at that time the plan appeared to be "freeze and park
> permissions with an unknown owner".
>
> * The dispute process clearly indicated that Peter didn't have the
> support of existing maintainers or the community for such a plan
> sufficient to disregard his prior permissions agreement with Matt.
>
> * Matt proposed a mechanism for the community to self-govern the DBIC
> namespace and development, sharing power between maintainers and the
> mailing list. (Revised proposal is linked as [2])
>
> * Peter revealed that his new employment situation allows him to
> continue development. [3]
>
> * Given Peter's track record and renewed availability, some in the
> community wanted to see an alternative proposal where Peter continued
> DBIC and the community took forward "DBIC2"; Andrew Beverl formalized
> a proposal [4]. In response to concerns about the proposal, Peter
> volunteered to clarify the alternative proposal.
>
> * Peter delivered an alternative proposal that could be summarized as
> "Peter takes sole control of the DBIx::Class namespace and does X",
> where at this time the plan appears to be "kickstart a DBIx::Class
> fork free of community bias". [5]
>
> Unfortunately for the community's deliberations, Peter has
> consistently provided minimal details on his plans, particularly
> regarding succession should he no longer be able to or wish to
> continue development. After Andrew Beverl's proposal, Peter said he
> would clarify by Nov 1 [6]. This target date then slipped to Nov 5
> [7], was pushed back again on Nov 7 [8], and pushed again to Nov 17 or
> else Thanksgiving [9]. On November 10, in the middle of this sequence
> of delays, I started a private email thread with Peter asking if there
> was anything I could do to help him formalize his proposal, but the
> thread stalled on the Nov 14. On November 26, I received a separate
> private email telling me I could set a deadline of Dec 1, if needed
> [10]. In our continuation of the stalled thread at that point, Peter
> and I briefly discussed what ultimately became his final proposal of
> Dec 3.
>
> I think some details in those private emails are relevant to the
> decisions at hand, so now that Peter has released his proposal and
> because Peter originally insisted that all discussions about DBIC be
> public anyway, I am now posting the content of that private email
> thread in full. [11]
>
> Specifically, I want to call attention to Peter's description of the
> future of DBIC as "two forks developed in parallel, by noncooperating,
> openly adversarial teams" which I think is more indicative of the
> stakes and situation than the simpler question of "where does the
> DBIx::Class namespace point". What an adversarial fork means for the
> future of the repository, mailing list, bug trackers, module
> ecosystem, and community itself, etc. is undefined and community
> members may wish to consider that in their decision process.
>
> Given Peter's stated intent to launch a "fork free of community bias",
> it's clear there is no governance alternative for the community on the
> table. Matt's original proposal had enough support to be adopted
> outright [12], has been amended with generally good feedback, and has
> provisions for future self amendment. I consider it operative in its
> amended form as soon as this vote is concluded, with the only missing
> piece being what specific namespaces it governs.
>
> The question thus comes down to whether the community feels "official"
> DBIC is best developed going forward by a self-governed community or
> by a single individual with absolute control (with both the good and
> ill that comes of that). The community may wish to consider the track
> record and personalities of everyone involved for both scenarios in
> weighing a decision.
>
> As there has been more than enough time spent on these topics and/or
> waiting for clarification already, and since the options on the table
> aren't materially altered from their earlier forms, I don't believe
> further discussion, debate or new alternatives will provide better or
> clearer options for the future of DBIC. It is time for this dispute
> to be resolved so everyone can move forward.
>
> Therefore, I submit to the list the following two proposals:
>
> * PROPOSAL A: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed under the amended DBIC community
> governance structure proposed by Matt Trout. Decisions about the
> future development of the project, including but not limited to
> stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be
> governed by the community under the same terms. The community will
> choose whether/how to continue active development of DBIC under that
> name or a separate name. Peter will choose whether/how to fork DBIC
> to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> * PROPOSAL B: Primary permissions for DBIx::Class and related
> namespaces shall be managed solely by Peter Ribasushi until he
> transfers it to another of his choosing or appears permanently
> incommunicado (whether by choice, accident or death). Decisions
> about the future development of the project, including but not limited
> to stability policy, new development, branching and freezing shall be
> made at Peter's sole discretion. Peter will choose whether/how to
> continue active development of DBIC under that or a separate name.
> The community, under the governance proposal, will choose whether/how
> to fork DBIC to a new namespace for independent development.
>
> List members should reply to this email with an email body indicating
> clearly "Proposal A" or "Proposal B". Other responses, such as "+1"
> or "me, too" replies to others' votes will be disregarded.
>
> Voting will close 72 hours after this email is sent.
>
> I will tally and announce results shortly thereafter. I will be sole
> arbiter of any voting irregularities. Once announced, I will transfer
> namespace permissions accordingly and consider the matter resolved.
>
> Regards,
>
> David
>
> [1]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governa
nce-and-future-development-td7578987.html
> [2]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Governance-and-sustainability
-td7579228.html
> [3]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/IMPORTANT-A-discussion-of-DBIC-governa
nce-and-future-development-tp7578987p7579158.html
> [4]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-
tp7579168p7579175.html
> [5]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/Decision-time-which-fork-inherits-the-
existing-DBIx-Class-namespace-tp7579255.html
> [6]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-
tp7579168p7579184.html
> [7]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-
tp7579168p7579208.html
> [8]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-
tp7579168p7579225.html
> [9]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/An-answer-and-a-question-tp7579248p757
9250.html
> [10] https://gist.github.com/xdg/836e6341b757df8b67cf26f02b6899d6
> [11] https://gist.github.com/xdg/955519bee08658f9b60c6219a51fd0dd
>
> [12]
>
http://dbix-class.35028.n2.nabble.com/GOVERNANCE-Aggregation-and-conclusion-
td7579168.html
>
> --
>
> David Golden <x...@xdg.me> Twitter/IRC/GitHub: @xdg
> _______________________________________________
> List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
> IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
> SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
> Searchable Archive:
> http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
DBIx-Class mailing list
DBIx-Class@lists.scsys.co.uk
http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
End of DBIx-Class Digest, Vol 138, Issue 8
******************************************
_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/dbix-class@lists.scsys.co.uk
