Thanks Emmanuel for the reminding!! I have never thought of our ML being so important :). Also note some discussion should be to the Kerby ML (at least cc to it), when it only happens in [email protected] for Kerby related discussions.
October, ah, yes, two holidays in the month in PRC! By the way, I've been in hospital almost the whole month, and I'm recovering well. Anyway, hope we could do better in the following. Thanks again. Regards, Kai -----Original Message----- From: Emmanuel Lécharny [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 4:19 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Communication concerns Hi guys, I'd like to express some concerns about the way the Kerby project is currently being conducted. The mailing list (especially this one) should (must?) be the main media when it comes to express the direction the project is following. JIRA is just a tool. In the last few months, I have mainly seen a lot of JIRA being created, and even long discussions being conducted there. I do think that such discussions should happen on the mailing list. Let me explain why : - JIRA gather a lot of various tickets, some are very begnin, some are important. It's hard to distinguish between them when you have a lot of opened JIRAs - For exernal users, who don't have an account on JIRA, all they see is the mailing list, and its archive. Looking at kerby ML archives, you may think that it's a dying project : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/directory-kerby/. The July archive was perfect, as you can see, there were a lot of interesting discussions going on. October, not so much... - ML is the ASF natural interface : 'if it's not on the ML, it does not exist" (http://apache.org/foundation/mailinglists.html) : "Publicly archived mailing lists are critical to the operation of the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) and to our many Apache Projects <http://projects.apache.org/>. Apache projects use mailing lists to coordinate development of the software and administration of the organization. Mailing lists also serve as a primary support channel where users can help each other learn to use the software." - JIRA is kind of exluding people from cooperating : one committer creates a JIRA, then brew a fix, and apply it, then close the JIRA. This is a one-man show, in some ways. Actually, there is nothing really bad in that, except that most of the time, except for obvious bugs, a feature addition or a architectural change should deserve some open discussion, ie through the ML. Bottom line, I think it's time to rethink the way the kerby committers are working. I'm not blaming anyone here, I'm just saying we are driftng from what should be the Apache Way, and it has to be addressed. At the moment, it's just a concern *I* am having, and I may be wrong, so please feel free to speak your mind : nobody is to blame, I'm just aimaing at improving the potential for new committers to join the project. Many thanks !
