This reflects my sentiments as well.
Regards,
Alan
Matt Hogstrom wrote:
Jason Dillon wrote:
I second your opinions, but that's how we operate and I can't do much
regarding this matter other than to spare some time and vote at least.
I think I'm not alone thinking that RTC is very painful, but some see
it as a remedy of our troublesome happenings in the past. We'll see
how it work out. The only thing I can do is to do my best to speed it
up a bit and be more active in RTCs (given my manager doesn't get me
swamped with other daily tasks that took me away for the past weeks).
Not mentioning there're lots of bugs reported.
I think that if the Apache Geronimo community is actually
self-governing as I believed it was, then there is something that can
be done about this.
You are definitely not alone in thinking that RTC is painful (and
non-functional I would like to add).
I'm confused now... how can one send a RTC w/o having a patch or
patches for others to review?
Yes, you might've been confused as it's Matt's statement nor mine and
thus the origin of your confusion, isn't it?
Honestly... I don't know... but I am confused ;-)
My point was that for very complicated changes like M1 -> M2 a note
outlining the proposed action should not require a fully baked patch.
Perhaps I misstated.
I have never been as active in open source projects (Apache Geronimo
and OpenEJB in particular) as I should've been. I haven't been able to
manage my daily workload wisely and spare more time to work on these
OSSes at nights. At this point I'm completely overwhelmed with other
stuff meaning I don't have as much time as is required from me to
contribute.
It happens... which is why we have a community of developers to help
pick up the slack. Unfortunately some decisions have been made which
limit the abilities of the bulk of the community and force the
minorities to play a much bigger part, which unfortunately most have
not stepped up to do.
Jason, RTC was implemented because the PMC chair and the Board felt
that the G community was not functioning in an open fashion. I don't
want to repeat that whole debate as its been debated and nothing
positive will come from rehashing it.
RTC has improved communications I think is achieving its desired
effect. Yes, the side effect is slowing down some development. I
know its frustrating but if we work well together through the process
changes (RTC) we will be moving back to CTR. Complaining about RTC
won't get us there. Yes, we're all frustrated and we all will get
through this working together.
I see it as a threat to me being a PMC member. Do you
think I should step down having failed so often?
Not at all. I don't believe that you should step down at all. You
are one of the few PMC folks that is actually trying to keep up with
the RTC and I certainly don't want to see those numbers reduced.
As I mentioned before, I was not aiming my comments at anyone in
particular. I have just been quietly ignoring the situation for
sometime, and feel that I can not do that anymore... it is not in my
nature.
I agree that Jacek is doing great. Collectively we all make this work
and all contributions great and small move us forward.
I remember having discussion about a distinction between a committer
and PMC member. Some believed there's none.
I'm not sure that there is (or should be) much difference.
It's not my decision to activate RTC, which as far as I understand has
never proven itself to be successful, but that's reality we need to
live in.
If our community is self-governing and the bulk of the community is
in opposition to this rule, why then does that community need to live
with it?
See above about the Board and PMCs perspective of our community dynamics.
BTW, that is my opinion... I have not performed any poll to see which
parts of our community actually is in favor of RTC. I would suggest
that most folks agree that improved and more frequent communication
is desired... but I also suggest that RTC in its current incarnation
is NOT the best way to achieve those goals.
Its moved us back from where we were at. Certainly past where we
should be but I'm optimistic that we'll move back to the center.
I believe, though, that it won't kill the project, but strengthen.
That all depends on how long it goes not for...
IMO, the longer it does, the more chances are that the end-result
will be a more and more defunct community.
* * *
Thanks for taking the time to respond. I apologize if my comments
stir your frustration... but I felt and fell like I have to say
something, to play my part in this community.
--jason
