On 1/12/2012 2:36 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Hi All,
I thought I would chime in to put things in perspective a bit.
The original goal was originally to find a universal, fast, command
line JMX client.
Such a tool would be incredibly useful, Java applications and
application servers, and JMX are not going anywhere, and each one has
its own management tool. Jmxsh and Jmanage fall short, and are not
fast and easy to use. This tool, I think became a bit convoluted in
the community process, with people checking in whatever they felt
should go into it. I still believe this tool fits a crucial need, as
was agreed upon when I presented this utility to LAJUG. Lack of talent
certainly isn't the problem here. I think that someone just has to
take the lead and get brave about rejecting commits and leading the
direction. I'm fine with that, as long as someone is willing to do the
development work. I'm also ok with retiring the project, if that's
what the community wants and votes on, but I think that there will
still be a void in the Java app world that will go unfulfilled which
this utility was supposed to serve.
With that perspective expressed, what are the communities sentiments?
Sincerely,
msacks
-----Original Message-----
From: "Alessandro Novarini" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 5:05am
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for Jan 2012 ([ppmc])
Hi all,
As I stated, I spoke basically for myself and the report may not
reflect the general feeling of the current team.
I wasn't blaming anyone, that has to be clear, because otherwise I'll
be the first one to be blamed for having been away for such a long
time.
I completely understand everybody has its own
life/job/interest/whatever, my regret is that we still haven't reached
a critical mass for keeping the project going even if some of the
developer stop working on the project.
Unfortunately, I don't have a solution for that; as you said, some
projects are interesting enough to attract more people, some other
projects are not.
This has nothing to do with the technical aspect of the project nor
with the quality of the code; when I remarked that it was for pointing
out that when Matthew started the project he was - i guess - the only
one with a clear idea of how the project would progress.
Now I think the only one left is Pid, but for my understanding he's
quite busy at the moment, I really do hope he will have some time in
the nearly future to hop on again, I enjoyed the time we all worked
together.
About the meritocracy thing: yes, I agree again with you here
everybody as a team could be the PO, what I think is that some of the
'power' you get from acquired merit won't last a lifetime, but it
could also be lost. To me that's something everybody should aim to
keep what he gained, and there is no shame in changing their mind
during the whole process. That's why I raised the point about how many
people are still interested in Kitty.
I honestly have no idea what the features for a project like Kitty
should be added or improved, so I'm sorry, but I'm simply not fitted
for that role.
I would really read from other people their thoughts about the
project, I hope everybody will find some spare time to join the
discussion.
Thanks and have a good day
Ale
On 12 January 2012 02:19, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 11, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Alessandro Novarini wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've just finished writing the report on the wiki page.
> > Sorry if I might seem rude or not polite, I only tried to base the
report on facts relevant to me, as we didn't discuss together about
the actual status of the project.
> > I trust if anybody had something to complain, he could freely
update the report with the due corrections.
>
> Hi Ale,
> Thanks for the report. I don't have many quibbles with what you've
written.
>
> I do have a few general comments:
>
> Communities ebb and flow. Sometimes communities go through slow
periods. This is not necessarily a problem.
>
> Sometimes Incubating projects retire. Not all projects work out. Not
all projects attract a critical mass for an effective community. This
is not a failure -- and in no way necessarily reflects on the
technical aspects of the code. Nor does it reflect on the people who
contribute to the community.
>
> That said, if people care about the project. They can keep it going,
contribute, and eventually graduate from Incubator. I have no doubt
that can easily happen for Kitty… People make successful projects and
communities. They don't just happen...
>
> And a specific comment:
>
> Re: "The lack of a "Product Owner"" -- the "community" is the
"product owner". Anyone (or group of people) can assume this role.
Apache is a meritocracy. If someone has ideas on where the project
should go, wants to define/prioritize tasks, and provide the community
with what features need to be implemented -- they can do so. Anyone
can do this -- current committers or someone completely new to the
project can initiate this. So, if someone is interested in the
project, don't just wait for someone to tell you what to do -- *do*.
Or, better yet, do *and* tell other people what to do… ;-)
>
> --kevan
>
>
In response to this email, I think if we can tackle KITTY-5 and KITTY-6
issues in JIRA we've met the goal of functionality of the original
mission of KITTY.
Then, if we do a bit of bug squashing and documentation we should be set
for a release candidate.
Once we have a release candidate, the goal will be to document the
flexibility of using Kitty as a universal JMX client for various
application types that support JMX.
Comments, disagreements, quibbles, accosts?
:)
M
