It's still the same architecture from the beginning. Only Improvements ;)

And of course we will try to help as best as we can in case of questions
about certain specialties.

Regards, Achim


2016-09-28 12:42 GMT+02:00 Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]>:

> It is a learning experience/opportunity, and next time it will be
> smoother. Also, almost without exceptions, someone who is working on fixing
> something get answers when they ask, often quickly, because everyone here
> wants new people to succeed and become more productive over time.
>
> Achim, Guilaume and others were not the originators of Pax Web either.
> They dug into what we had at that time, and made improvements (or was it a
> complete rewrite?)... I don't recall how much help they needed, but if they
> needed it, "we" (who were more active then) tried our best to help us much
> as we could. And I am sure this tradition still runs in this community, and
> many others "out there"...
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>
> Niclas
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 6:15 PM, iJava <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Achim
>>
>> If no one of the developers do it in the nearest future then I will spend
>> about 20 hours trying to fix it.
>> It is obvious that it will be much more difficult for me because I don't
>> know the inner architecture of pax-cdi
>> and pax-web.
>>
>> But firstly I need Guillaume Nodet update pax-cdi 1.x branch to align
>> with pax-web 6.x.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> воскресенье, 25 сентября 2016 г., 12:20:02 UTC+3 пользователь Achim
>> Nierbeck написал:
>>>
>>> Alexander,
>>>
>>> I still fear you miss the point of Open Source Software. And what the
>>> free in free software means. [1]
>>> It isn't about free as in free beer it is about free as in freedom to
>>> read the sources, about the freedom to participate.
>>>
>>> And as I already stated previously to you. It certainly isn't a one-way
>>> street where on the one end the "stupid" developers reside and the other
>>> end is a consumer that just needs to bark loud enough. It's a give and
>>> take, so think more about what you can give the community[2].
>>> How about you take some of your private time and try to fix the issue
>>> which bothers you so much in your productive environment?
>>> Maybe your employer, who obviously earns money while using this open
>>> source software, gives you some time to fix the issue?
>>> Or as Niclas already stated, find someone to do it for you and pay that
>>> person.
>>>
>>> regards, Achim
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] - http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
>>> [2] - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/community
>>>
>>> 2016-09-25 9:04 GMT+02:00 iJava <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> Hi Niclas
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for detailed answers to my questions.  Now I understand how
>>>> this community is managed -
>>>> to say more correctly how this community is unmanaged.
>>>>
>>>> To tell the truth it is a very strange for me - but this is of course
>>>> my private opinion. I believe
>>>> that bad plan is better then the absence of the plan. It is clear why -
>>>> because with bad
>>>>  plan actions at least are coordinated.
>>>>
>>>> I am not a contributor and "don't dare" to make any suggestions. But
>>>> about "dare" to use open sources
>>>> projects. You know - I am developer,  I develop some products and use
>>>> other products. When I use some
>>>> products it is clear that I want to know the future of the product, And
>>>> it is quite common to see the roadmap
>>>>  of the project. Please, note it is quite common and in open source
>>>> projects.
>>>>
>>>> By the way it would be helpful not only for users who "dare" to use the
>>>> products. It would be helpful and for
>>>> developers and they would have the questions like in this thread
>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/ops4j/q8A4qniAtCg
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> воскресенье, 25 сентября 2016 г., 2:34:03 UTC+3 пользователь Niclas
>>>> Hedhman написал:
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Apache Member
>>> Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
>>> OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer
>>> & Project Lead
>>> blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
>>> Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
>>>
>>> Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master
>>>
>>> --
>> --
>> ------------------
>> 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.
>



-- 

Apache Member
Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/> Committer &
Project Lead
blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>

Software Architect / Project Manager / Scrum Master

-- 
-- 
------------------
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.

Reply via email to