On 10/25/2012 07:44 PM, Chris Geer wrote:
On Thursday, October 25, 2012, Jasha Joachimsthal wrote:
Hi Chris,
it has been more quiet indeed on the mailinglist, but there is still a lot
of development going on. We now have 2 branches and a sandbox for the model
split, MongoDB and content services. I hope they will merge into trunk
soon, so it's more visible that new functionality is developed, and it will
decrease the chance of merge problems.
You are right, maybe "momentum" was the wrong word choice. Maybe
collaboration would have been better. I'm with you, I look forward to
getting some of these major overhauls integrated. Just in time for the next
round of major overhauls :)
Right :)
Let me first say I fully agree with the feedback from Ross and the thoughts
about the practicalities of a roadmap. I'm all for cleaning and clearing up our
longer term goals. Some of which maybe are outdated or no longer desired. And
reaching agreement on a short term and practical feature set for a 1.0 release
seems good to strive for.
I also agree having multiple major overhauls in separate branches doesn't seem
to work well from a collaboration and community perspective. Especially not if
they are too widely scoped, experimental or time consuming, like what I think
the content integration sandbox turned out to be.
Maybe we should strive for not spawning off more than one active branch at a
time? And keep them as short-lived and concretely scoped as possible.
With respect to our sandbox work for content services integration: I'm in the
process of wrapping that up, technically I think it is about done (for a
sandbox) and IMO worked out quite well actually. But it also gave us some new
insights causing us to pause and ponder a bit more about how to proceed from
here. And that very much does relate to the roadmap and how we want to leverage
and integrate Rave in our environments.
Not going into detail here now, I will come back on this next week and start the
discussion about if or how to merge and integrate some or all of these features
into the trunk.
Ate
On 25 October 2012 18:55, Raminderjeet Singh
<[email protected]<javascript:;>
wrote:
Thanks Chris for taking a lead to identify the problems with Rave
activities and Roadmap. I think everyone will agree with you here. I
admit
that i missed your email Model Split email. We have requirements where we
want to customize user model so i will take a look at the branch this
week.
I volunteer for the feedback.
My 2 cents on development activity is we need to set some Roadmap for
Rave
1.0( a wish list). We should not keep going with 0.xx. That will bring
everyone back with their choices about Rave 1.0. We can setup some
developer hackathon using Google hangout etc between now and ApacheCon.
We
made a great presence in ApacheCon 2011. We need to do the same for
ApacheCon 13. ApacheCon can be set as a milestone for Rave 1.0 (just an
idea). To achieve that milestone community need to start talk about 1.0
and
document it on wiki [1]. We need to expand on little details on
architecture documents also for new users to start.
The next ApacheCon starts in 10 days ;) Unfortunately I can't be there, but
would love to join a hangout in one of the evenings. I know some of the
other Rave committers will be there.
Jasha
I agree with Ross that we can better spend time implementing than
documenting but have a wish list for 1.0 can give a better direction to
the
community.
1. http://wiki.apache.org/rave/RoadMap
Thanks
Raminder
On Oct 25, 2012, at 12:36 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
I'm a little out of touch with Rave as I'm busy elsewhere, as you
surmise many people in your thoughtful mail below.
In general though it is normal for a community to go quiet
periodically. Things tend to happen in waves. When one individual gets
busy they motivate others to get busy simply through their actions.
I'm never much of a fan of roadmaps being formally defined by a PMC. A
projects roadmap is set by the people with time to work on it at that
point in time. Putting a list of things that the PMC considers
important on a website doesn't make those things happen. That being
said, a little periodic re-evaluation of objectives and updating of
the website certainly doesn't hurt. For example, I noticed that the
home page still reflects the very high level roadmap that was defined
during at proposal to the incubator. Some of the items on the "future"
list have been implemented. Of course, I could have updated the home
page when I noticed this, but I didn't because I was too busy at the
time (and still am).
If you have the time and the desire to define a roadmap that you think
is important and you wish to ask for feedback on roadmap then go for
it. However, personally, if I find I have some time for Rave I'll
probably spend that time just implementing what is at the top of my
personal agenda.
Finally, with respect to your mail that has had no response, lazy
consensus means that no objections means agreement. I've reviewed your
mail but don't have any opinion on it since I have not reviewed or
tested your code. But you are a committer so I'm +0 on supporting your
recommendations (not +1 as I don't have the time top properly review).
If you want a little more explicit support for the proposed merge then
post a reply to your own mail saying "no feedback so I assume all is
good. I'm going to merge in the next few days". That will bring it
back to the top of peoples inboxes and possibly prompt more review.
Finally, once you have done the merge if it all goes wrong or someone
wants to object for a solid technical reason the changes can be rolled
back.
In summary, you are a committer. We operate a commit then review
policy here so don't be afraid to just get on with it :-)
Ross
On 25 October 2012 17:13, Chris Geer <[email protected]> wrote:
Over the past couple months there has been a growing worry of mine
that
we
are loosing some momentum/cohesiveness as a team. As a metric, if you
look
at the dev mailing list, the traffic for the past three months has
been
very low (September was awful). What finally spurred me to send this
message was the fact that I sent an email [1] on October 13th, asking
for
some help reviewing a major change Matt and I had been working on and
haven't gotten a single response. I know it's not a sexy change but
it's
something that people thought was a good idea when it was proposed a
while
back. What I don't know is if the lack of response is because people
are
too busy, they don't care or they don't support the change but don't
want
to say that. The third option would concern me the most since we
should
feel free to provide feedback, both positive and negative.
My suspicion is that people are just swamped at their day jobs and
Rave
has
taken back (maybe far back) seat to normal life which is
understandable.
With that knowledge though, as a PMC we should probably spend some
time
really coming up with a priority list of items we agree need to get
done<
