Berin Loritsch wrote:

Stephen McConnell wrote:


Calling for a vote is about the least productive thing you could do to get consensus. If you want consensus then address the real issue. That means addressing the real problems of a container understanding the full implication of component deployment.


I am not even going to bother voting on this vote. This is simply a mistake. I will consider it totally invalid and I certainly will not feel bound by any outcome. Until we recognize and address and solution to the problem of full and complete description of a components requirements to a container – we are simply not addressing the real problem. Either abstract the problem or solve the problem. Calling a vote is a waste of everyone’s time.


Stephen, it is this anti cooperative spirit that is causing most of the
problems.


No Berin!

Your idea of forcing consensus through a vote without addressing
the real issues is causing this problem. I cannot support your
proposal because does not address a solution the problem.
I can only conclude that through your call for vote that you do not
understand the problem or implication of the solution your are
proposing. How can I endorse an action if I fundamentally disagree
with the logic behind the action?

We can continue the discussion of you refusing to cooperate
on the PMC list.


You could continue this discussion here. The subject is the
relevance of your proposal to the problem and the implications of
your proposal to the problem. You can try to shift this to a
Steve versus Avalon PMC adventure if you like. But its a waste of
time. If you have something to say - say it here because its
something that concerns everyone here.

For now, the vote stands, and any publicly released
Avalon technology *will* be bound by its outcome. I advise
you to vote.


I regret to inform you that your advice on this occasion will
not be respected. If you don't like that then I would respectfully
suggest that you go back to the real problem, understand the issue,
understand my objection (which was incorrectly presented in your
email), and work towards something that would address the concerns
and issues that I have raised.

If you refuse to abide by the decisions of the Avalon team,
then I highly recommend you reevaluate that position.


I can abide by decisions when they are decisions that make sense.
This scenario does not make sense because you are proposing
something that will ultimately be detrimental to the Avalon
community. I know you don't see this nor understand the
implications - but you could at least spend the time and get to the
point where you do understand and appreciate these points.

I am saying that this vote is premature. The issues and solutions
are not resolved. Your actions will result in division. Is that
what you really want?

Steve.

--

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net

Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
http://avalon.apache.org/sandbox/merlin




--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to