On Jan 14, 2008 2:24 PM, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, January 14, 2008 5:06 pm, Martin Cooper wrote: > > On Jan 14, 2008 10:05 AM, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> It's true that we're volunteers, and any of us can walk away whenever > >> we like, but it's also true that when we vote +1 on a GA, each voter > >> is saying that he or she intends to help support the release. > >> > > > > No, it's not. That is a myth that you have been perpetuating for several > > years now, but it's just not true, and quite frankly I'm fed up hearing > > it. > > > > A +1 vote for a GA release is a vote of confidence that the > corresponding > > bits are suitable for GA release, and hence for consumption by "the > > public". > > Certainly someone casting such a vote may take into consideration the > > likelihood, or otherwise, that the release will be supported by the > > community (although in truth that should have been a topic of discussion > > before the bits ever came to a vote). However, a +1 vote is *not* an > > assertion that the voter, specifically, intends to provide such support. > > An open-source "community" based on the premise that simply throwing the > bits out there once you feel they are ready, and there is no implied > responsibility of those throwing the bits out there to offer at least > *some minimal degree* of support, is tantamount to a community destined to > destroy itself, plain and simple. Please try re-reading what I wrote. Unless, that is, you are saying that I should be *prohibited* from voting +1 on any release unless I am *personally* committed to fixing the bugs, even if there are a dozen other committers out there who I know for a fact are going to be doing that whether or not I do so myself. I am *not* saying that we should throw the bits out there and leave them to rot. I *am* saying that, as a PMC member, I have a right to vote +1 for a release even if I, personally, am not in a position to work on the code right now. Now, I *could* choose to be irresponsible, and vote +1 in the knowledge that nobody is going to support it, but I happen to believe that the people we have voted on to the PMC over the years are actually responsible people. -- Martin Cooper This would be much like the manufacturer of dynamite saying "here's the > sticks, we *believe* they're ready for your use, but don't assume we're > going to answer the phone if you come calling for help". I dare say no > one would use the explosive from that manufacturer given that statement, > nor would too many likely use an open-source project that made such a > statement, directly or implied. > > No, Ted's assertion, as I read it, is that open-source developers should > take at least *some* degree of responsibility for the bits they release, > and I happen to very much agree with that. The developers *are* the > community, isn't that a big part of the Apache Way? If those casting the > votes do not intend to support what they are voting for, who is expected > to? > > > -- > > Martin Cooper > > Frank > > -- > Frank W. Zammetti > Author of "Practical DWR 2 Projects" > (2008, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-941-1) > and "JavaScript, DOM Scripting and Ajax Projects" > (2007, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-816-4) > and "Practical Ajax Projects With Java Technology" > (2006, Apress, ISBN 1-59059-695-1) > Java Web Parts - http://javawebparts.sourceforge.net > Supplying the wheel, so you don't have to reinvent it! > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
