Alexander, To the question on how things are prioritized; It is very simple. The person who wants to work on an issue places the priority on the issue. Before anyone puts down his/her own name on the issue, it should actually be marked "not prioritized" and if you disagree, simply change it, assign the issue to yourself and work on it. There is a "Participation" in the name here for a reason.
Perhaps so much time has passed that you and other relatively new people to this community are unaware of the early principles and purpose of OPS4J, the "Flock of Birds" metaphor, the "If you are committed enough to create a Jira issue, you are a committer". It was created as a pure code collaboration platform[1] among peers, without hierarchies and as it turned out[2] without planned governance. It was partly a reaction to the "Avalon break-down"[3] and "Barrier to Entry" that were discussed at Apache at the time (~2005). People like Toni, Achim, Pieber and many more started showing up with patches, and I bet many were surprised to know that they had to apply their own patches, because the rest of us were either too busy or too lazy to do it. Last time I checked (quite a few years ago), there had been >150 contributors and ~600 subscribers to this list. That is about 25% had an itch to fix, which is waaayyyy higher than places like Apache or Eclipse. So, I know that it can be quite frustrating when something doesn't work to one's expectations, and I am also aware that everyone doesn't have the skills to fix it, but those people generally don't dare to use open source directly, because they know (or should know) that there is no "support to call"[4], and they typically pay people to handle it. What IS common though, is that people (like myself) have the skills, but think that they don't have time, or that "someone else ought to fix it soon enough", and meanwhile one just hangs in there... IF it is truly a Blocker, then one needs to drop everything else and indeed fix it. If other things are more important, then it can NOT be a Blocker, possibly not even a Major issue. I am sorry if this comes across as harsh, but OPS4J is a "do-acracy". Those who do the work, decides what work to be done. MANY of the contributors here, are WAY MORE accommodating to user's requests than initially anticipated, and all the KUDOS to them. But maybe, just maybe, that has increased the expectations a tad too high. [1] Back then (~2005-2009), we ran our own servers, with mailing lists, Subversion, Confluence, Jira, Bamboo, Jenkins, Crowd and what not. An automated process, so that if you signed up on Crowd, you got commit rights automatically in Subversion. Back then, the managed services that we enjoy today, simply didn't exist. Keeping that alive was actually more work than we had expected, and eventually we compromised the "auto committer" system, in favor of externally managed services. [2] In the very early days, a governance model was established, but it fell apart because I think we all felt that it wasn't needed. There might be pages still discussing this on the Wiki, but those can safely be removed. [3] In Apache Avalon, a lot of people got involved in "you must do X", "you can't do Y", but those people didn't do the work, but based their opinions on either past contributions, or that they were a user depending on the codebase. The community got fractured like politics, and it wasn't fun. It got to the point where one release candidate contained a single constructor Javadoc edit (and nothing else), and I was accused of breaking compatibility by outsiders, who had no interest in working on the project. [4] If you need "paid support" on OPS4J, contact me privately and I will try to give you some choices. Niclas On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:17 PM, iJava <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I am also user of this list and let me add my two cents. > To tell the truth, I don't understand how the developers of pax-web set > priorities for the issues. > > I did report about the problem https://ops4j1.jira.com/browse/PAXWEB-760 > How important is this problem - this problem doesn't let update bundle of > the site > which is in production. This is core functionality as it is used > constantly. In our company > it would be issue number one - there is nothing more important then core > functionality. > > For example - if you develop a text editor and it can't save files you > don't > think about button hover animation. Could anyone explain what principles > are followed when next issues are chosen. Is there some roadmap of the > project? > I already asked about plans but unfortunately didn't get any answers. > > Best regards > > -- > -- > ------------------ > OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - [email protected] > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OPS4J" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java -- -- ------------------ OPS4J - http://www.ops4j.org - [email protected] --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OPS4J" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
