Avik Sengupta wrote:
> I "dont care" about this vote (any more). I do care deeply about POI. I
> do care about Apache and Jakarta. I resent the opposite presumption on
> less than rock-hard grounds, because it is a pretty big accusation.

As noted in my analyses, I stated that I could be misinterpreting things.

> The fact that the POI and remaining jakarta communties are separate is a
> FACT. Most people on this thread seems to have turned it into a
> JUDGEMENT. If that does not gel well with what the 'oversight'
> requirements, we need to find a way to work WITH the community, rather
> than attack it.

See my reply to the board report (where you stated the wording was harsh).

> All open source project projects contributors go thru highs and lows of
> contribution. Commiters come and go, some permanently, some temporarily.
> (I recall reading a well written account of this from either Brian or
> Stefano.. cant remember... anyone have a link). At POI, we're lucky
> enough to have fresh blood coming in at regular intevals (as with most
> open source projects, usually from nowhere, surprising you with their
> commitment and great code..). Once again, we need to work with this
> phenomenon, rather than condemn the whole project on that basis.

Condemning the project isn't what my goal is. And I think I made clear in other 
mails that POI is
pretty healthy with development, user base, etc. (Since I am not a user of POI, 
I cannot judge it
technically, although I assume you wouldn't have any users if it was 
technically bad).

> The charge of insularity can go both ways. This thread is only about SNV
> access. Can I not ask how many of the indignant correspondents on this
> thread have taken the effort to come and help us get things right on the
> poi dev lists? However, that's an argument that wont get us anywhere, so
> lets not go down that path.

There were efforts in the past (see my board report reply) and I was thinking 
of taking a different
approach, which I described in the board report too.

> So in reply to every other offer of help, welcome! But I dont
> understand, why do people want to  be an officially anointed 'mentor'
> before helping out? I thought the Apache way was about  the 'doing' ...
> he who does ... etc.  Please join the POI dev lists, and show us where

I joined the dev and user list before I became VP. And I thought hey the vote 
thread isn't finished
yet. Hence my e-mail to poi / private list about the release. After that offer 
you could have asked
for help (which was offered) and state "we are on it" or something (about the 
release itself not
being checked).

> we go wrong. We'd even instituted a policy to open the svn access to all
> jakarta committers for only asking.

If you read this thread Andy gave a very different explanation of this policy 
to me (although I
could have misread him).

> Permit me to get personal to illustrate my point. When Henry noticed a
> few issues with the release, he wrote back saying what they were. Some
> we've pushed back, other's we've promised to fix, and in the meanwhile,
> he's offered to fix some of them himself, an offer that's been very
> gratefully accepted.

I read the thread.

> This thread, on the other hand, has degenerated into complete POI
> bashing. Once again, I'd be happy to discuss the merits of this svn
> proposal... its the subsequent bashing that completely baffles me.

Just speaking for myself here : I just wanted to open up svn karma as a first 
step to improve
things. Maybe it should have been the last vote in the process. When there was 
asked about the
reasoning behind the vote, I just added the same thing I already said in the 
mail about the release
(about PMC members giving oversight) and trying to get to bounce the ball back 
to the project to get
some answers on eg the legal issue, which still remains partially unanswered.

If POI bashing is what I did, my apologies, although after rereading the 
thread, the negativity
comes from both sides and I also seen a lot of messages with positive attitude, 
so let's focus on
that :)

> Finally Martin, you say "If you have anything positive to
> contribute..."; dont know if you mean me personally or the project as a
> whole, I find that a wee bit offensive... sorry if I'm misunderstanding.
> POI is in active development, used by thousands , 

Never disputed that, I even said that in the message you are replying to. I 
wanted to make clear
with that statement (the positive part) that in that respect the project is 
doing more than well
(which I stated in other parts of the thread as well). I was kind of missing 
that in the responses
from, in this case, you.

it doesn't need a
> mandate from the PMC to be successful project, does it?

It does need a mandate to be a successful project, which is the thing I am 
trying to solve here,
that most requests/vote announcements don't get a response is because the vote 
and release is
because we have lazy consensus. Some do get a response (eg not the needed 3 +1 
votes from PMC
members. So if you don't have the mandate to do a release from the PMC you are 
going to have a hard
time being successful.

> I regard this mail as positive. Hope I am not wrong.

You are not wrong, hope I didn't undo the positive part though (was at least 
not my intention)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to