ivankelly commented on issue #570: Multiple active entrylogs URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/570#issuecomment-369563815 Hey @charan, @jvrao, @sijie > to answer ?when/where was this discussed part?, I can point you to the meeting notes, mail exchanges, slack messages and git links which I shared with the community throughout the period. The only mails I can see for this are the two linked threads, and the subject of these have very little to do with per ledger storage. It seems most of the discussion took place on other channels. The meeting notes show it was discussed but not what was discussed. Participation in the meeting is dependent on being available at that time, and no detailed record is retained. Slack messages depend on everyone being online at that time. Synchronous communication makes it hard for people to participant. This is why ASF encourages that all discussion happens on the mailing lists [1][2]. The reason I'm taking exception to this, is because when I proposed that this be done a different way, I was told: - "Sijie, JV and our internal team had long conversation about the same and I responded to community aswell in one of the mail" [3] - "I think this has been discussed a while back. I would suggest no holding this for requesting a new ledger storage implementation" [4] - "I am suggesting here is to respect to what have been discussed and agreed on". [5] Suggesting that the design of the feature is a settled issue, and a long open discussion had already occurred for it. This is not the case. ?If it didn?t happen on-list, it didn?t happen.?[2]. > While it is nice to discuss ASF requirements for a pull request and the level of design discussions on the community email, the real crux comes down to the technical merit of the patch. The ASF's motto is "Community over code". > We can have another meeting if needed, and my request is to move forward on the pure technicality of the patch rather than design preferences. Meetings are the problem here. The discussion should be on list, where everyone can see it and there's a permanent record. I'll respond to the technical/patch size issue in a different comment. [1] http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#communication [2] http://theapacheway.com/community/ "Mailing list" section [3] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/570#issuecomment-368597767 [4] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/570#issuecomment-368654064 [5] https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/570#issuecomment-368826780 [6] http://www.apache.org/dev/contributors#comdev
---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
