Jason Dillon wrote: > Guys, I feel like I am allowed to state my opinions. > > I am not complaining (and a bit insulted that you think I am), but I > believe that RTC is harmful for a few reasons. > > I also feel like some responses to mails I have sent are basically that > I should shut-up (my words), which I do not appreciate. >
Of course you have a right to speak your opinions, and they are welcomed. The key really becomes how constructive they are. Clearly RTC is a PITA. But it also was heavily needed to right ourselves from a collaboration and communication perspective. IMHO, I think it has been successful, and once we have shown that we are working together better as a team, I am sure we will be able to move back to CTS. > :-( > > --jason > > > On Jun 30, 2006, at 5:35 AM, 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
