Hi Willem, that's the reason why I wrote "IRC/Skype session for discussion" and not "IRC/Skype session to make discussions"... ;-) The proposed procedure is to use IRC to be able to discuss multiple topics in short time. Afterwards the IRC log and may be a summery should be shared with the community (WIKI page, @dev mailing list, ...). After a sufficient amount of time (e.g. 72 hours) we can make decisions on the mailing list.
Because of an urgent reason, I couldn't be only today from 7:00 - 8:00 PM. But it looks like I didn't miss anything. Work this proposed schedule for most of you (every Thursday 7:00 - 8:00 PM)? Best, Christian On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Willem jiang <willem.ji...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Christian > > Just one comments for the meeting in IRC. > It is not an Apache Way to make decision through the IRC. > As you know the time you chose is the middle night (3 AM) in my timezone. > > Maybe we can drop a discussion lines in the wiki page, so every one who > wants to join the discussion can have the same page to look in. It could be > helpful to past the IRC talk into the wiki page at the same time. > > > -- > Willem Jiang > > Red Hat, Inc. > FuseSource is now part of Red Hat > Web: http://www.fusesource.com | http://www.redhat.com > Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (http://willemjiang.blogspot.com/) > (English) > http://jnn.iteye.com (http://jnn.javaeye.com/) (Chinese) > Twitter: willemjiang > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > > > > > On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 5:34 AM, Christian Müller wrote: > > > Hi Hadrian! > > > > Please find my comments inline. > > > > Best, > > Christian > > > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com(mailto: > hzbar...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > Christian, > > > > > > Thanks for taking the initiative and restarting the process for Camel > 3.0. > > > The good news imho is that we're under no pressure and we can take the > time > > > to get it right. > > > > > > Right. > > > > > > > > I like your proposal of effectively splitting the camel-3.0-roadmap > page > > > into multiple pages. If I understand correctly you are suggesting the > > > following: > > > - proposals should go on the [ideas] wiki and the discussions on the > > > mailing lists would refer to the wiki > > > - the [ideas] page should only contain items currently under discussion > > > - accepted ideas should move to one of the [roadmap] pages > > > - keep separate [roadmap] pages for changes to be implemented in > > > [2.x-roadmap], [3.0-roadmap] and [3.x-roadmap] > > > > > > Absolute correct. > > > > > > > > The goal is to move faster and to avoid votes except in highly > contentious > > > situations which we hope to avoid. I think that would work. I also > think > > > that have an open concall on irc (plus maybe other channel) at a > scheduled > > > time would be great, although hard to accommodate the time zones. > > > > > > Right. I propose every Tuesday 7:00 - 8:00 PM Central European Time, but > > I'm open for others if someone has issues with this (starting tomorrow). > I > > propose we use our normal IRC chat room at irc://irc.codehaus.org/camel( > http://irc.codehaus.org/camel) and > > see how it works. Using IRC has the advantage of easy publishing the chat > > at dev@ after. > > > > > > > > I would add the following: > > > 1. The ideas on the [ideas] page should be short, containing just an > > > abstract. If it takes more than that the details should go in a > separate > > > [discuss] thread or another page. > > > > > > Do you think we should go ahead and endorse on the ideas page? Otherwise > I > > will start some [DISCUSS] threads for the ideas I will promote. > > > > > > > 2. Keep [discuss] threads focused on one topic only > > > 3. Use endorsements (e.g. username or initials like [hadrian]) to show > > > support for an idea (or [-1 hadrian] for a negative endorsement) > > > > > > Good idea. I updated the new Roadmap page. > > > > > 4. Once an idea has enough endorsements (3-5, dunno, need to agree on > > > something) and no negative endorsement for at least say 72 hours or > more, > > > we move it to a [roadmap] page. > > > 5. Have only a limited number of 'editors' to move [ideas] to [roadmap] > > > 6. I am also thinking that each accepted idea on the [roadmap] should > have > > > a champion (not necessarily to implement/commit the code, but stay on > top > > > of it) > > > > > > If no objections within 3 hours I will get to organizing the pages. > > Thanks for the initial work. > > > > > > > > In terms of concrete development, Guillaume had a very interesting > > > proposal at ACEU in November. We discussed concrete ways of > refactoring the > > > api and realized that it's very hard to fully explain an idea without > > > showing some code and it's even harder to grasp the consequences > without > > > experimenting a bit with the code. We talked about doing that either > in a > > > (1) separate, possibly github, repo, (2) on a branch or (3) in the > sandbox. > > > This would have the advantage of being able to show an fast idea > without > > > concern for backward compatibility and all. More I thought about it, > more I > > > liked the approach. Of the three alternatives, the one I like the most > is > > > (3), I guess. > > > > > > If we can have multiple sandboxes for different ideas, +1. > > > > To anticipate objections (miscommunication will happen no matter how hard > > > we'll try) backward compatibility and easy, painless migration are > major > > > goals for 3.0, I would assume everybody agrees. The ways to get there > are > > > many though. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > Hadrian > > > > > > > > > > > > On 01/16/2013 04:12 PM, Christian Müller wrote: > > > > > > > I find it very difficult to start a such huge and important > challenge as > > > > Camel 3.0 will be, for sure. I think the most difficult part is to > get > > > > consensus about what we do it and how we do it. We already collect > some > > > > useful ideas at [1], but I have the feeling we have to review these > ideas. > > > > First of all, because I don't think we can do all of them in one > release > > > > (I > > > > also have a few more - more important from my point of view - ideas, > > > > collected from users, contributors, committers and PMC members). > Second, > > > > some ideas need more "meat" before someone else than the authors > know what > > > > this means and which impact it has. Third, a few of these ideas are > > > > already > > > > implemented in Camel 2.11 or before, so that we can remove it from > this > > > > page to be more focused. > > > > > > > > - Rename "Camel 3.0 - Roadmap" into "Camel 3.0 - Ideas" > > > > > > > > - Start a fresh "Camel 3.0 - Roadmap" WIKI page which we will fill > with > > > > content in the next weeks > > > > - I propose to subdivide this page into three (child) pages: > > > > - What has to be done before we can start working on Camel 3.0 > > > > (probably > > > > during the (short term) Camel 2.12) > > > > - What are the changes we do in Camel 3.0 > > > > - What is postpone to 3.1 or later > > > > - Afterwards we put everything together, we will see on which ideas > we > > > > already agree and which ones requires detailed discussions. > > > > - For later ones I propose a weekly (or two times per week) IRC/Skype > > > > session for discussion (Which days/time fit best for you?) > > > > - We should also start a [DISCUSS CAMEL-3.0: <TOPIC>] thread at > dev@for > > > > the guys they are not able to attend > > > > - Afterwards we will send the results to the dev@ mailing list to > > > > share > > > > it (if you are interested in it, join us at dev@camel.apache.org(mailto: > dev@camel.apache.org)) > > > > > > > > I will start with it after 72 h to give everyone the possibility to > > > > suggest > > > > another approach (I will only start writing down some ideas which > are not > > > > on table right now). And of course, every help is welcome. A simple > -1 or > > > > better +1 ;-) is not much, but also helpful and better than no > feedback... > > > > Better, if you join us [2] and ride together with us Camel 3.0. > > > > > > > > [1] http://camel.apache.org/camel-**30-roadmap.html< > http://camel.apache.org/camel-30-roadmap.html> > > > > [2] http://camel.apache.org/**contributing.html< > http://camel.apache.org/contributing.html> > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > Christian > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > -- > > > --
