Tetsuya,

Again, I wish you would direct your energy towards something more
productive.  Just because we can call votes on what color the webpage should
be, doesn't mean we should.  Its you're right as a committer or developer,
but picking what issues are REALLY worth effort is an art you would be wise
to perfect.  (Trust me, I'm still learning that)

> 
> 1. This vote was not meant to enforce all the code to be changed.
> If this vote will pass, we should change *only* the line "Apache POI"
> to "Apache POI, Apache Poi" at "The Apache Software License"
> (This will be done by myself) ... and from 3.0
>

Right, this is a product change.  I vetoed it.  Ryan vetoed it.  The motion
dies.  See: http://jakarta.apache.org/site/decisions.html

"An action requiring consensus approval must receive at least 3 binding +1
votes and no binding   vetos ."
 
"
Product Changes 

Changes to the products of the Project, including code and   documentation,
will appear as action items in the status file. All   product changes to the
currently active repository are subject to   lazy consensus.
"

This means there is no need to vote on it, but if someone objects they can
-1 it.

> 2. There's nothing to be related to the existing bugs. Naming
> is naming, bug is bug.
> 

However, voting on this and discussing this is an effort that your asking
the community to make at a time where we have things which are more
important to do.  We have a limited resource which you're asking for us to
expend on this.

> 3. I think Nicola and Stefano's opinions are important. They are
> our *advisor*, *mentor*. We really respect them and I think they
> have right to participate in this vote.
> (if this issue was just a coding issue, of course I did not convene
> them)
>

This may be your feeling Tetsuya and I respect that.  However, it is not how
things are done in the projects of the Apache Software Foundation.  We have
voting rules and roles.  You may feel that these are wrong, however this is
not the place or way to address that.  (You can petition the members/board
or Jakarta PMC to change the voting rules, etc.  You'll likely get a rebuke)

Do you think that Nicola Ken's request to change to an Emeritus Committer
meant "I'd like to vote on issues such as the way to spell POI?"..  And do
you think that when Stefano unsubscribed from the list saying "I don't have
the time to devote to this project and feel that its community and code are
strong and are doing well without me?" that he felt this way?

More or less, Stefano left his role to me.  His role (as the sponsoring
member of the project) was primarily legal oversight and how to grease the
bureaucratic wheels as well as advising me on how to build a community
around POI.  The fact that you are here is testimony to the fact that he has
succeeded and moved on.

I now serve this same role for the Tapestry project.  I plan to leave that
to Howard Lewis Ship very soon as he's not only been inducted into our ways
but is a very adept community builder/coder.
 
> 4. This vote is equivalent to "Poi to be known as POI in the future?".
> 

Right, A product change.  It is vetoed with cause, the motion dies.

> 5. Ryan, Poi is not "taro-root" ethnic food. Hawaiian ethnic food
> is "poi", to be precise. The naming "Poi" was just derived from the
> name of this food, just as "Apache Cocoon" is not related to the movie
> as well as silkworm.
>

Humm, I named it.  POI = Poor Obfuscation Implementation and the taro root.
Poi is an acceptable *alternative* spelling.  This was decided by the
committers at the time over two years ago.  Marc Johnson liked this double
meaning and agreed to it.

You wish to set policy where we need none.  In fact, have you noticed how
everyone has started to reach consensus on things that we have NO policy on?
Compare this to other parts of Apache where policy setting has run amok and
committee making is running amok.  Let us hope we never follow that pattern.
The less rules there are to follow the happier the committers and developers
are.  

The only rule right now is that POI is spelled POI in classnames and "poi"
in package names.  This is for sanity's sake (ever notice that in the JDK
URL is spelled both URL and Url?  How annoying.)  It's a practical thing.

It is not necessary to enforce your will on others in issues of personal
preference.
 
> 6. I assumed your opinion might be [+-0], from your statement earlier
> , Andrew.
> 

You were incorrect, my vote is -1 which means it is vetoed.

> 7. Let's vote! >> other committers/ developers!
>

There is no point, I've vetoed and even if I could be moved (which I can't
because I think this is an errant thing to discuss as the issue has no
logical technical conclusion, its like inducting our joint official favorite
color), I'd be TOTALLY unmoved in discussing this further now when we have
so much to do.
 
Feel free to continue the vote, but note that it has no effect on the
outcome.  The issue is decided because multiple committers VETOED it per the
voting rules of the Apache Software Foundation.  Only one veto was required.
You have that and then some.

While this is not particularly important, I think the granularity and
magnitude of issues that we generally take the time to vote on can be
determined by the fact that we have voted on only about 10 issues minus the
obligatory "release" votes in the last year or so.

The community-minded thing to do would be to move on and work on something
we can reach consensus on.  I suggest something that benefits the community
and is not based on an issue of personal preference.

-Andy


> 
> -- Tetsuya ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> 
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 12:47:47 -0400
> (Subject: Re: [VOTE] ATTENTION!! 'POI/Poi naming issue')
> "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> -1
>> 
>> Tetsuya, the voting rules dictate this is a product change and is not
>> Majority Rules, its consensus, which means even if the "I don't feel like
>> going through all the code and changing it" crowd didn't have it, it STILL
>> wouldn't pass even my -1.  (Its a product change by virtue of changing all
>> of the APIs to Poi).  My -1 is based on the reasons stated earlier.
>> 
>> I don't mean to be curt, but I'm intensely confused by why this issue is
>> more important than:
>> 
>> 0. The like 50 serious bugs that need to be looked into many of which have
>> i18n issues
>> 1. The 2.0 Release
>> 2. The 3.0 merge
>> 
>> Please note that Nicola is not a committer any longer (this needs to be
>> updated he should be listed as Emeritus) and Stefano never was (he was our
>> sponsoring member/advisor).  While I would -1 any attempt to remove him out
>> of respect, I believe he has left the legal oversight to me at this point.
>> 
>> -Andy
>> 
>> 
>> On 7/27/03 12:07 PM, "Ryan Ackley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>>> My issue with the name is really technical and I think Andy already
>>> illustrated this point. POI is an abbreviation for Poor Obfuscation
>>> Implementation, Poi is a word for a Hawaiian ethnic food. POI is what our
>>> project really is, not Poi.
>>> 
>>> Ryan
> 
> <snip/>
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

-- 
Andrew C. Oliver
http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp
Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI

http://jakarta.apache.org/poi
For Java and Excel, Got POI?


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to