Talking offline is fine. Throw in beer and it's even better. Can't wait to see everyone at ApacheCon next week.
My beef was in the very first sentence of Aaron's email which came after a community vote.
"I talked to Jeremy. Our plan for now is that I will check in a
deployer tool that includes the following features:"I read this to mean that the features we voted on where not going to be committed and a new vision discussed offline was going to be committed. I should have asked Aaron to clarify his statement as taking action against a vote without public discussion is against The Apache Way. Aaron did clarify his statement, which I greatly appreciate:
"I guess some people thought that this was an instance of
#1 [making critical decisions without input from others,
offline], where Jeremy talked me out of the other half of the
solution, thereby circumventing the community consensus and
making a critical decision offline. In fact, I was just
frustrated with keeping my pending changes in sync on several
different computers, and I wanted to try to get some online
features in before M3/ApacheCon."This clears it up for me. Mystery solved. Water under the bridge.
My apologies to Jeremy as I had assumed the decision to commit a new deployer was part of a their discussion.
I personally think Aaron's behavior was pretty good on this subject despite a poorly phrased sentence. With all the scm activity that takes place without any vote at all, I don't want to see someone punished for bothering to propose a vote. A good mix of both is healthy.
-David
On Nov 7, 2004, at 11:07 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Last Thursday, Aaron Mulder and I had a heated but healthy technical discussion on this list about the implementation of certain features in the new deployer. It became clear to both of us that continuing to use email was getting unproductive and Aaron pinged me on IM to see if we could discuss them directly.
We had a very productive hour-long discussion, clarified areas where we agreed and where we both saw issues, and came to consensus on how to proceed. Aaron summarized this to the list here:
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9712
which basically says he was going to commit his new stuff for online deployment and offline packaging. He also inquired here:
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9713
about how to create a experimental branch which he planned to use to check in the code for the areas that had issues that still needed to be resolved so that the entire community could see them and discuss.
At the same time I promised to email the list a detailed description of
the issues as I saw them. I told Aaron that this would take a couple of
days and that things were really busy at work (for the record my company
was in crunch mode getting a release done).
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9721
The response to this by two members of the community was bitter and personal, almost indicative of paranoid delusion. In a stream of vitriolic email mostly with other community members I have been accused that my behaviour is not in the "Apache Way", of trying to create a "back channel", of not directing opinion to the list, of not fulfilling my obligation to vote, and had my motivations treated with suspicion.
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9714
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9717
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9718
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9727
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9743
This is neither healthy nor technical. This behaviour is harmful to the reputation and perception of this community and this project. It will not be condoned.
My promised description of the issues I saw has been sent to the list and is available at
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg? [EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=9851
Let us civily seek consensus and get this behind us.
-- Jeremy
