On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:36 -0500, Greg Stein wrote: > > I agree with you, but tabled my protest because in practice what we > > have is working, doesn't seem to be a barrier to contribution, and > > > everyone seems happy with it (even the casual contributors). > > I wouldn't say "everyone". This whole thread started because at least > one person is not happy with it.
You're right, I wasn't being very precise with my wording. "Overwhelming majority", or "people actually doing the work" would have been better. > > I actually work with these people on a daily basis, and I trust that > > when/if it actually does become a problem, that people will be open > > to changing it. > > This actually scares me a bit. That a discussion of methodology is > happening among a few people at work, rather than among everybody on > the mailing list. Maybe this is another case of me not being precise enough with my wording. I routinely collaborate with the members of the Cassandra community, on IRC and mailing lists, (not at my place of employment). > >> My opinion is that it is very unfortunate that Cassandra feels that > >> it cannot trust its developers with a CTR model, and pushes RTC as > >> its methodology. The group-mind smashes down the creativity of the > >> individual, excited, free-thinking contributor. > > > > Cassandra is in incubation, so by all means, use the IPMC group-mind > > to smash the individual, excited, and free-thinking Cassandra > > contributors into submission. > > My opinion was asked, and I answered. Please don't ascribe more to it > than that. Sure, but the IPMC is in a position of power, and can impose it's will upon the project (including CTR vs. RTC), right? -- Eric Evans eev...@rackspace.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
