On May 19, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org> wrote:
> In January I turned off nagging and nobody ever asked why the nag mails > stopped. I saw Sebb mention it on Commons' dev list but not because > anybody had asked for it. Even the Ant folks (including myself) who > used to watch Gump closely didn't recognize the build had been failing > for a week or two. > > So before I re-enable nagging, I wonder whether there really still is > any interest in the service Gump provides. And assuming some of the > projects are still interested whether we should prune those projects that > aren't. > > I don't really know for sure but over the past years the major feedback > I have received when I tried to engage with projects who's builds were > failing was "please turn off the nagging" - so maybe this colors my > perception. Yes, this makes it seem that we are performing a thankless task. Perhaps the right question to ask is who here at the Gump PMC is using its facilities to good effect, since we constitute the minimum viable community to keep it going. To answer this question for myself: no, I have no personal or professional use for Gump. In fact, the Mac OS X Gump run has been broken since I upgraded the os on the box, and no one seems to have noticed. I have had no time to investigate what is broken or how to fix it. I think Gump's premise (to doggedly compile the current HEAD against each other of as many projects as we can muster) should be valid, and a failure should be an important canary in the various development communities' respective coal mines. But if it's neither used nor appreciated, why are we still doing it? Other than "because it's there," which has mostly been my level of involvement. S. -- san...@temme.net http://www.temme.net/sander/ PGP FP: FC5A 6FC6 2E25 2DFD 8007 EE23 9BB8 63B0 F51B B88A --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@gump.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@gump.apache.org
