Moon, your references to the "apache way" are laughable. As you yourself showed, what's broken is CI, not the PR. You've committed numerous PRs that broke CI. Dozens of them, if not hundreds.
The person who insisted on CI working is not you -- you said you would merge 208 without CI -- it was me! You even insisted on releasing 0.5.6 before CI was fixed, over my objection. You committed in December to fix CI. After 10 weeks, you had established that I was right, but did nothing else. @bzz looked at it also. He also established that I was right. After 6 weeks, he wrote part of a test script that copied some of the dependencies. But then he stopped--when you declared that 702 had to be merged at the same time as 208, even though the community had rejected it. So stop pointing to CI -- the fault here is yours and yours alone. > On Mar 18, 2016, at 12:57 AM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > Community will is probably having R interpreter. That's why roadmap page > have R interpreter from the beginning, right? > > Community will is also probably not merging code that breaks test, right? > That's why we have CI facility and many community member put huge effort on > it. And that's how we make high quality software, which is considered as > one of philosophy of Apache way. [1] > > If you think 208 is ready for merge, even though it's breaking test, please > describe technical reason that you think, not accusing someone. > > Thanks, > moon > > [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#philosophy > > > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:22 PM Amos B. Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Moon - 208 has been ready for merge for six months. >> >> The reason it hasn't been merged is exclusively you--against the will of >> the community. >> >>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 10:34 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Amos, >>> >>> No one blocks you working on 208 and no one said we're not merging 208 >> when >>> it's ready. So please stop accusing community member regarding progress >> of >>> 208. >>> >>> More important thing i think you need to care is "Collaboration". >>> You don't need to worry about 702. Alternative implementation is not the >>> one you need to compete, devaluate and win, but the one you need to >>> collaborate, help and learn. >>> >>> You probably heard about "Community over code" [1]. and that exemplifies >>> Apache project. if you can show your ability to collaborate in the >>> community, that proves many more thing in addition to your code. >>> >>> Clearly accusing, devaluating someone else's work is not the way Apache >>> works. Please take one step back and look around you. Are people coming >> to >>> help you or are people scare away from you? Please think carefully about >>> what's the best way of spending your precious time. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> moom >>> >>> [1] http://theapacheway.com/ >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:09 PM Amos B. Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Moon - No-one in the community supported your refusal to fix CI. No-one >>>> supported your license theory, but you refused to abandon it until two >>>> mentors told you you were wrong. No-one supported your demand that 208 >> not >>>> be merged without 702. >>>> >>>> 208 has waiting action on your part or your employees -- with all tasks >>>> that were my responsibility complete -- since September. So don't point >> the >>>> finger-this is your train wreck and yours alone. >>>> >>>> Your approach has been to create obstacles; when the community goes >>>> against you, you promise to act; but then you do nothing; and when time >>>> passes and I complain that nothing has happened, you create another >>>> obstacle and complain that I said something mean to you. >>>> >>>> That is not the Apache way. It also not honest. >>>> >>>>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 4:51 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Amos, >>>>> >>>>> You seems always end up with personal attack and accuse someone when >> you >>>>> don't have reasonable answer. Your strategy is recognized well enough. >>>>> >>>>> But, please understand that your strategy will never work in this >>>>> community. Moreover your strategy is very much against the 'Apache >> way'. >>>>> >>>>> So, how about you try 'Apache way' this time? >>>>> That's the best way to get involved in this community and fastest way >> to >>>>> get what you want. Also it is more comfortable way which good for >> health >>>> of >>>>> everyone subscribing this mailing list :-) >>>>> >>>>> Everyone in this community will support you if you decided to change >> your >>>>> strategy to 'Apache way'. Let me know if you need any help. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> moon >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:42 PM Amos B. Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com >>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Moon, youve been impeding 208 since Felix asked you to. Your sudden >>>>>> recent interest in 702 is just more of the same. >>>>>> >>>>>> Your conduct has been obstructive and dishonest, and you've been >>>> thwarting >>>>>> the will of the community for months. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 3:35 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Amos, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I had volunteered help fixing CI of 208. Hope you're able to >>>> distinguish >>>>>>> 'wiling to help' and 'committed to do something'. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please remember, everyone in this community are volunteers and no one >>>>>>> paid/committed to work on 208. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think you have some misunderstanding of philosophy of Apache >> project. >>>>>>> Please read following links carefully before you trying to prevent >>>>>>> community member involving 702 any further. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#philosophy >>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hope those links helps change your point of view to Apache project, >>>>>>> especially for concept of collaborative, open and respectful. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> moon >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 10:07 AM Amos B. Elberg < >> amos.elb...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Moon you committed in December to fix CI and merge 208. In February, >>>>>>>> having broken your promise, you committed to stay out of it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> PPMC review has been *complete* since Dexember. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Your lack of integrity is truly astounding. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you will not honor your commitment to stay out voluntarily, then >>>>>>>> perhaps we need to begin a community discussion about your level of >>>>>>>> involvement. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 2:48 AM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Amos, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There're no such commitment. I wanted to stay out because of it was >>>> too >>>>>>>>> noisy. but i can always be involved if i want. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You're not trying to interrupt PPMC reviewing contribution, right? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> moon >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 10:58 PM Amos B. Elberg < >>>> amos.elb...@gmail.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Moon - you committed to stay out of these issues. If you're going >> to >>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>> involved at all, you should start by honoring the commitments you >>>> made >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> the past. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 1:45 AM, Leemoonsoo <g...@git.apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Github user Leemoonsoo commented on the pull request: >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/702#issuecomment-197717065 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> @echarles Can there be one integration test such as >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/blob/master/zeppelin-server/src/test/java/org/apache/zeppelin/rest/ZeppelinSparkClusterTest.java#L87 >>>>>>>>>> ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>> If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and >>>>>> have >>>>>>>>>> your >>>>>>>>>>> reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have >> this >>>>>>>>>> feature >>>>>>>>>>> enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not >>>> working, >>>>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>>>>> contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a >> JIRA >>>>>>>>>> ticket >>>>>>>>>>> with INFRA. >>>>>>>>>>> --- >>
