On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 29 November 2013 05:33, Lakmal Warusawithana <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Honestly, to me , I feel that , "we are" is "active PPMC/committers", but
> > problem may that, current all active committers are from WSO2.
>
> This is only true if a "we" statement can be backed up with a public
> mailing list thread where the community reached consensus. (Otherwise
> how can one person say "we" and mean anything other than "I" or "me
> and some people I talked to in private".)
>
> But I do not think we have that. So these "we" statements sound like
> they refer to internal WSO2 consensus.
>
> That's the nub of the problem.
>
> > But I agreed, we (committers)  should clearly discuss these things in dev
> > list, because who are not actively following the developments may confuse
> > with the process. Will work on these items and will correct the process.
>
> Cool.
>
> But note: it's not that we need to be clearer about our process for
> people who are less familiar. It's that decisions to cut milestones
> (or releases) need to be taken by the community, and on the dev list.
> At the moment, the decisions appear to be unilateral. i.e. Arriving on
> the list as foregone conclusions.
>
> So, in this particular instance, a better approach might be to post a
> DISCUSS thread proposing a milestone and asking for comments,
> feedback, etc.
>
>
Yes, I already add this into milestone build process which i started
discussion in a separate thread.



> --
> Noah Slater
> https://twitter.com/nslater
>



-- 
Lakmal Warusawithana
Software Architect; WSO2 Inc.
Mobile : +94714289692
Blog : http://lakmalsview.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to