Great, thanks! On 30 November 2013 02:12, Lakmal Warusawithana <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 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/ >
-- Noah Slater https://twitter.com/nslater
