Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-29 Thread Stefano Mazzocchi
Stephen McConnell wrote:

-Original Message-
From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 21 December 2004 20:22
To: community@apache.org
Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Stephen McConnell wrote:
No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the
ASF.
Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.
Then clearly you have been negligent in your responsibility towards
the
Avalon community.
No more than, say, the federal government is to citizens of a state
when that state passes laws that encroach on federal authority.  I.e.,
not at all.  Things stand until they're tested.
Bravo, Stephen; you've now competely and utterly convinced me that
you're an accomplished troll.  It's evidently impossible to hold a
reasoned discussion with you.  Apparently you're not the least bit
interested in Truth; all you're interested in is Being Right.  Or
so it seems to me.
Until you demonstrate that you can at least attempt dispassion and
objectivity, I don't intend to waste any more of my time responding
to your trolls.

Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion within
this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
decision.
Yes, Stephen, you are right: 9 directors, 120 members, 10 PMC members 
and 200 subscribers to this list are wrong and you are right.

You are so right.
Oh my god, you are so right, please, please, take us in your new 
wonderful world, please, take me with you! I so love your magic wisdom 
and the fact that no matter what you have an answer for everything and 
your world is so clean and perfect and shine

[john lennon's imagine playing in the back]
please, please, take me with you, I was wrong, all of us where wrong... 
you know how to make software, you know how to make people unite for a 
cause, you know how to bring money and experience and knowledge to 
people so that they will be grateful to you and send you good vibes...

please, please, don't go away, stay with us, become the Executieve 
Director and lead us to the next millenium and teach us your wisdom, 
humility and balance.

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


RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-22 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

  No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the ASF.
  Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.

 Then clearly you have been negligent in your responsibility towards the
 Avalon community.  If the Avalon policies are invalid - why did the
 Chairman not say so?

Actually, it was said at the time that the community was focusing far too
much on such rules, and that the term bylaws was inappropriate because
the only bylaws were the legal ones for the Foundation.

-- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 17 December 2004 08:42
 To: community@apache.org
 Cc: community@apache.org
 Subject: RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 At 08:30 PM 12/16/2004, Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 Concerning our decision making processes, I have a couple of
 questions...
 
   * What do you think is the role of a PMC in our decision
 making process?
 
 They have absolute decision making process within the board's
 mandate for their project.

Bill:

According to Greg Stein this should not be the case.  Greg holds to the
opinion that the appointed Chair is the PMC and that the members are
simply an artificial construct.

I should point out that Greg's position seems to contradict section 6.3
of the bylaws in that it is stated that a PMC is a committee with a
designated chairman.  The bylaws also seem to clearly state that the
committee is responsible for active management.  

In the Avalon case-study the Chair largely ignored the notion of
committee responsibility and chose instead to exercise privileges
related to the role of officer of the foundation.  In doing so he
actively and publicly took actions without consulting the Avalon PMC and
on at least one occasion justified this on the grounds that the PMC
would not agree with his position.

IMO there are two related issues here:

  a) the lack of accountability of the Chair towards the committee
  b) the reluctance of the Board to properly recognize the PMC as the 
 responsible entity

I think that there are practices that can be adopted to address these
issues.  For example a committee should have the ability to remove a
chair (for example via a vote of no-confidence) and such an action
should be recognized as within the authority of the committee.

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:54, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
  I give you an example of what I call 'compromise' and 'collaboration' ;

 Those events as you describe them did happen.  If they were the only ones,
 we'd have a happy healthy community.

:o) 

  Each individual works on what he/she finds interesting, relevant
  and important. Opinions are appreciated, but by no means right,
  just because a group within the community say so.

 Actually, all it takes to veto a change is one PMC member to cast a -1 with
 a technical justification.  The issue is how a community deals with those
 vetos, and how progress can be made by resolving them.

So, please bring to the table a particular case, since I fail to recall any 
such veto being ignored and/or not worked on to be resolved, other than the 
mentioned Leo Simons' (was he even PMC at the time? still not ignored.) one, 
which got caught up in a larger mess.

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 04:29
 To: community@apache.org; Noel J. Bergman
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:54, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
  Niclas Hedhman wrote:
   I give you an example of what I call 'compromise' and
'collaboration'
 ;
 
  Those events as you describe them did happen.  If they were the only
 ones,
  we'd have a happy healthy community.
 
 :o)
 
   Each individual works on what he/she finds interesting, relevant
   and important. Opinions are appreciated, but by no means right,
   just because a group within the community say so.
 
  Actually, all it takes to veto a change is one PMC member to cast a
-1
 with
  a technical justification.  The issue is how a community deals with
 those
  vetos, and how progress can be made by resolving them.
 
 So, please bring to the table a particular case, since I fail to
recall
 any
 such veto being ignored and/or not worked on to be resolved, other
than
 the
 mentioned Leo Simons' (was he even PMC at the time? still not
ignored.)
 one,
 which got caught up in a larger mess.


Leo was not on the PMC at the time - in fact I think he posted his veto
to the PMC list after having left Avalon.  Also Leo retracted that veto
not long after posting it.  But Noel was a PMC Member so he's aware of
this - so perhaps Noel is referring to something else?

Steve.



 Cheers
 Niclas
 --
+--//---+
   / http://www.dpml.net   /
  / http://niclas.hedhman.org /
 +--//---+
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 11:19, Stephen McConnell wrote:
 Greg holds to the
 opinion that the appointed Chair is the PMC and that the members are
 simply an artificial construct.

Before anyone is requesting the quote where Steve get that notion from;
http://www.apache.org/~niclas/irc/2004-05-15.022554.txt

which is an IRC session regarding the fork/transfer/something of Phoenix to 
James, via an SVN import into Avalon's SVN space. Everyone is aware that this 
IRC session is logged and available to the public (before people hammer for 
that.).

Following quotes from Greg Stein (and one McConnell);
(12:10:11) gstein: mcconnell: aaron *is* the PMC
((12:46:05) gstein: the members of the PMC is an artificial construct created 
by the Chair
12:48:15) gstein: mcconnell: the board expects a PMC to operate in a consensus 
fashion,
(12:48:38) gstein: but when a PMC *cannot* operate in a consensus fashion, 
then the Board leaves it to the Chair to figure out the right solution.
(12:52:47) gstein: if Aaron wants to ask the PMC, then he can.
(12:57:17) mcconnell: then don't ask aaron for an opinion because aaron has 
not talked with his PMC MEMBERS
(12:57:29) gstein: mcconnell: doesn't matter to me. that's up to him.


In my personal opinion that also seems to suggest that committer and/or PMC 
vetoes are also of no interest. The PMC Chair is an ultimate decision maker 
(at least in the view of Greg), who from time to time decides how to deal 
with disagreements.

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 On Tuesday 21 December 2004 05:05, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 Regardless of whether there was any 'right' or 'wrong' position, it
 appears that there were irreducible differences.  I only recall one
 side expressing a willingness to compromise.  My memory may be imperfect,
 though.
 
 Now, if I have no sense of collaboration, taking care of the Legacy and 
 compromise (in this case balancing my time between Excalibur vs Merlin), 
 then I have no clue what you guys expect from people.

And I have no clew why you think I'm speaking specifically about you,
nor why you're dragging 'legacy' and 'collaboration' into your reply to
me.

 ISTR some issues about ignored vetos and vetos without sufficient
 justification.
 
 (Don't know what ISTR stands for)

'I Seem To Recall'

 The only veto I know of that has been in dispute, is Leo Simons veto against 
 the new site, which in defense I say;
 1. It came in late, long after the change was executed.
 2. His issue was regarding the change of wording in the specification of the 
 AF4.2, which he claimed was an incompatible change for component authors.
 3. In the midst of that clarification, heaps of people stepped in with other 
 issues, murking what is on the table of a veto and what is not;

There is no statute of limitations on vetos.  There is no deadline.
When a veto is made, it must be supported by technical justification.
There are two ways to deal with a veto: 1) Address the concerns and
get the vetoer to rescind it; or 2) let it stand and the vetoed aspect
stays out (getting removed if necessary) of the code.  It can't get
much clearer than that.

  The agenda was to promote Merlin
  into a platform for component oriented architecture. When that was
  considered being against approx half the PMC and some additional
  developers, we started the process of taking Merlin to TLP, but the
  Excalibur group just needed to be better, and by throwing in a second
  proposal, at least one member of the Board intervened privately, and
  asked us to drop the Merlin TLP and forge ahead with the new vision. Now,
  I call that a mandate.

 Please clarify what you mean by 'mandate' here.  That the board was
 mandating that you drop the Merlin TLP idea?
 
 Mandate that the Board, or parts thereof, thought it was better to spin the 
 Legacy into a new project and let Avalon grow into a Merlin-based community 
 and the visions we had.

That's nothing like a mandate in any of its definitions.  You appear
to be using heavily loaded terminology to excuse something, and using it
incorrectly at that.  Someone privately makes a request, and you're
interpreting it as an official position of all (or a majority) of the
board?

  Yet, Excalibur TLP
  without me and Steve was manna from heaven for this group, but it was
  definately a matter of balkanization along people and not technology.
  Something Mr Coar would never agree to.

 One thing I don't agree to is people putting words in my mouth.  Please
 cease doing so.
 
 So you want the quote? You have been hammering me before for publicizing 
 private mails
 
 quote timezone=UTC+0800 
 On Monday 27 September 2004 22:37, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 snip/
  So let's cut straight to the chase;
  What are the severe reservations that you seem to have against the Metro
  proposal? Just spill it out so we can solve it :o)

 it appears to me to be a balkanisation based on people rather than on
 technology.
 /quote
 
 That was the only reason you stated against the Metro proposal. I can accept 
 that never is a bit strong, but I can't interpret your response in any 
 other way.

Then you're being uncommonly obtuse, and apparently only to suit your own
purposes.  'I have a serious reservation about this because it appears to
be xxx' is a lng way from 'I will never agree to this because it is
definitely xxx.'  And evidently you did absolutely nothing to 'solve' (your
word) or otherwise address my reservation -- either that or you're hauling
out my remark sans context in order to support your current point.

Either way, you put words in my mouth, and I requested that you stop.
Dredging out personal email (which, yes, you didn't bother to ask about first,
but in *this case* I don't mind) doesn't make that acceptable.  So this
handwave doesn't excuse you claiming that I would 'never accept' something.
And I ask again that you stop.  Phrasing it 'which I don't think Mr Coar would
ever accept' is okey, because it makes it clear that you're stating your
*guess* of how I would react.

As far as it goes, I continue to stand by that reservation.  IMHO, setting
up a TLP because the would-be participants can't get along with the other
people in their current TLP -- or those people can't get along with them --
is not a good path.  Among other things, it could give both sets of people
the idea that being fractious and divisive is acceptable behaviour.
- --

Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:41, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

 You seem to keep forgetting that I supported Merlin havine a home
 at the ASF.

Very much appreciated :o) , as I know you normally saw through all the BS that 
was part of the Avalon stage.

 Point?

That consensus by attrition is a negatively loaded term, yet a natural 
occurring thing in all projects (people do leave healthy projects) which is 
replenished with new blood (but in our case that is also turned into 
something bad).
SO the point is; Consensus by attrition is FUD, and hard to argue against, 
yet said enough many times, it has turned into a fact.

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:

 On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:54, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

 Actually, all it takes to veto a change is one PMC member to cast a -1 with
 a technical justification.  The issue is how a community deals with those
 vetos, and how progress can be made by resolving them.
 
 So, please bring to the table a particular case, since I fail to recall any 
 such veto being ignored and/or not worked on to be resolved, other than the 
 mentioned Leo Simons' (was he even PMC at the time? still not ignored.) one, 
 which got caught up in a larger mess.

Out of simple curiousity, what would this accomplish?  I am not being
flip.  It seems clear that there are aspects on which all the players
are unlikely to ever agree, so this would seem likely to prolong the
vocal non-agreement.  The Avalon project has been shut down; parts
have moved outside the ASF and are under active development there.
What is there that requires that this become the Thread That Wouldn't
Die, and why?

If there's a reasonable reason, cool.  Otherwise, maybe we can move
on.  There'll be no 'winner' here.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcegXZrNPMCpn3XdAQHPTQP/cMGXabvnlqzYZvLjkHpZFhf1+gGiwph1
ZuvXJ5/UYnPq+hWt4RRqnLeBl0SC7JMLN9WXzGc/HZYaQ5k3qBN8B8JLZyGkH1Om
z+wRbO/Zy7YswvyJ4vIg4xlHut0OXef+Sx7ePFSUQ0T3OAeIflhI+o9Gs5GaMERu
idtb9YAB5No=
=fxy0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:

 On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:41, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
 
 Point?
 
 That consensus by attrition is a negatively loaded term, yet a natural 
 occurring thing in all projects (people do leave healthy projects) which is 
 replenished with new blood (but in our case that is also turned into 
 something bad).
 SO the point is; Consensus by attrition is FUD, and hard to argue against, 
 yet said enough many times, it has turned into a fact.

People leaving a project for J Random Reason is acceptable attrition.

People leaving because they don't agree with the majority opinion is, too.

A practice of asking people to leave, or trying to drive them away, because
they don't agree with you is not acceptable.

Charges of the latter were levied, and as I recall were supported by the
email archives.  If so (i.e., if I'm not misremembering), it's a factual
observation of behaviour, not FUD.  I suspect Noel already has the
relevant source documents ready to hand if necessary.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQceiAprNPMCpn3XdAQFiSAQArJh8/1MVGH/yPzsaS7M9gjEtkv/pyvaB
L4h5ndDHLAKJaVpNG53Izlkq4H+GMsWvP/TZ4v0s3xA6lAHMoatwAjrvpxG1wgDZ
k5EkiXNGBLxOxIddfZYygbnqOAm0qvdmRO4vpX/nN+vPB9APoOFKGeLzPP+ru8KC
0/p/wEfDraM=
=N2QT
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 12:09, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 People leaving a project for J Random Reason is acceptable attrition.

 People leaving because they don't agree with the majority opinion is, too.

 A practice of asking people to leave, or trying to drive them away, because
 they don't agree with you is not acceptable.

 Charges of the latter were levied, and as I recall were supported by the
 email archives.  If so (i.e., if I'm not misremembering), it's a factual
 observation of behaviour, not FUD.  I suspect Noel already has the
 relevant source documents ready to hand if necessary.

( On PMC list == not in mail archives. But that is beside the point. )

It is a single occurrence in time, and in my book everyone is allowed to make 
occassional mistakes. You make them, I make them, everyone makes them.
I think the difference of Hey, Steve that is not acceptable! warning, to a 
categorical character assassination across the ASF is a bit much.

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 12:02, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
  On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:54, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
  Actually, all it takes to veto a change is one PMC member to cast a -1
  with a technical justification.  The issue is how a community deals with
  those vetos, and how progress can be made by resolving them.
 
  So, please bring to the table a particular case, since I fail to recall
  any such veto being ignored and/or not worked on to be resolved, other
  than the mentioned Leo Simons' (was he even PMC at the time? still not
  ignored.) one, which got caught up in a larger mess.

 Out of simple curiousity, what would this accomplish?  

That FUD is prevalent in ASF establishment, against its own contributors, for 
unknown reasons, possibly unintentionally, by an unnamed, possibly unknown, 
person or a group of persons. And that FUD is being amplified by everyone 
else into facts, and *I* definately don't like these kind of patterns.

If you bring accusations to the table, back them up with some examples. That 
is what I am asking for.

 If there's a reasonable reason, cool.  Otherwise, maybe we can move
 on.  There'll be no 'winner' here.

I think there is procedural value of walking through what have happened. A bit 
of transparency among how this organization is run vs how it states it is 
run. I would hope that the Board has an interest in that scrutiny of its 
actions is regularly exercised, to clear its honorable members of any 
misdoings, doesn't it?


Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 11:50, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 Then you're being uncommonly obtuse

obtuse? (is that insult or compliment? otoh getting the true meaning from a 
dictionary is probably not a good idea :o(  )

  'I have a serious reservation about this because it appears to
 be xxx' is a lng way from 'I will never agree to this because it is
 definitely xxx.'  And evidently you did absolutely nothing to 'solve' (your
 word) or otherwise address my reservation -- either that or you're hauling
 out my remark sans context in order to support your current point.

Since you ask me so harshly to keep under the lid what the exchange was in the 
coming mails, I can apparently not clarify where the 'solution path' led to, 
can I?

 As far as it goes, I continue to stand by that reservation.  IMHO, setting
 up a TLP because the would-be participants can't get along with the other
 people in their current TLP -- or those people can't get along with them --
 is not a good path.  Among other things, it could give both sets of people
 the idea that being fractious and divisive is acceptable behaviour.

Yet IMNSHO the establishment of the Excalibur TLP was more balkanization along 
people than technology, than the establishment of a Merlin/Metro TLP. So why 
did that happen? 


Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Noel J. Bergman
 consensus by attrition is a negatively loaded term, yet a natural
 occurring thing in all projects

Not when the attrition is caused by unhealthy friction and stress within the
community, and an active (and stated) goal to remove those who didn't share
a particular vision.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 05:10
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 
 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 
  On Tuesday 21 December 2004 07:41, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
 
  Point?
 
  That consensus by attrition is a negatively loaded term, yet a
natural
  occurring thing in all projects (people do leave healthy projects)
which
 is
  replenished with new blood (but in our case that is also turned into
  something bad).
  SO the point is; Consensus by attrition is FUD, and hard to argue
 against,
  yet said enough many times, it has turned into a fact.
 
 People leaving a project for J Random Reason is acceptable attrition.
 
 People leaving because they don't agree with the majority opinion is,
too.
 
 A practice of asking people to leave, or trying to drive them away,
 because they don't agree with you is not acceptable.
 
 Charges of the latter were levied, and as I recall were supported by
the
 email archives.  If so (i.e., if I'm not misremembering), it's a
factual
 observation of behaviour, not FUD.  I suspect Noel already has the
 relevant source documents ready to hand if necessary.


OK - let's play this game but let's do it properly.  

Open up the Avalon PMC archives and let's really get down to real metal
and in the process I think we will clean up more that a couple of
popular misconceptions.  In fact publishing this stuff would be in best
interests of the foundation - unless of course somebody has something to
hide, and surely, that's not the case, not here.

Stephen.




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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

 William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
  Stephen McConnell wrote:
* What do you think is the role of a PMC in our decision
  making process?
  They have absolute decision making process within the board's
  mandate for their project.

 According to Greg Stein this should not be the case.  Greg holds to the
 opinion that the appointed Chair is the PMC and that the members are
 simply an artificial construct.

 I should point out that Greg's position seems to contradict section 6.3
 of the bylaws in that it is stated that a PMC is a committee with a
 designated chairman.  The bylaws also seem to clearly state that the
 committee is responsible for active management.

Actually, it says that the that the PMC shall consist of at least one
officer of the corporation, who shall be designated the PMC Chair, and who
shall be primarily responsible for project(s) managed by such committee,
and he or she shall establish rules and procedures for the day to day
management of project(s) for which the committee is responsible.

 [The PMC Chair] actively and publicly took actions without consulting
 the Avalon PMC and on at least one occasion justified this on the
 grounds that the PMC would not agree with his position.

Aaron consulted with the PMC on every occasion that I can recall.  In the
case of migrating Phoenix to SVN, you can hardly claim that he made a
unilateral decision.  Probably more than anyone, I am the resident
pain-in-arse about preserving ALL history, which I consider a corporate
asset.  And I am absolutely unapologetic about

   a) the lack of accountability of the Chair towards the committee
   b) the reluctance of the Board to properly recognize the PMC as
  the responsible entity

You raised similar issues in the past.  If it comes down to it, the
Membership owns the Foundation.  The Foundation is run for the Public Good
as best we can, and those who demonstrate merit are invited to become
Members, Officers and Directors.

 a committee should have the ability to remove a chair

The PMC lacks the authority to do so.  Rather, the Chair has the authority
to remove members of the PMC.  The Chair does not report to the Committee.
The Chair reports to the Board and ultimately to the Membership.

--- Noel


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Craig McClanahan
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:31:03 +0100, Stephen McConnell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 OK - let's play this game but let's do it properly.
 

I've got a better idea ... let's not play the game (any more) at all.

The decision was made (and I, as an Apache member, consider it to be
in *my* best interest, as well as in the best interest of the ASF). 
It's done.  It's over.  It's now an off topic conversation for this
list.

If you guys had put the same amount of energy into your software that
you put into your arguments, the world really would have been a better
place as a result of your efforts.

Craig McClanahan

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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 05:30
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
  consensus by attrition is a negatively loaded term, yet a natural
  occurring thing in all projects
 
 Not when the attrition is caused by unhealthy friction and 
 stress within the community, and an active(and stated)
 goal to remove those who didn't share a particular
 vision.


If I remember correctly you coined the phrase, and now you are promoting
this left right and center presumably as your rationalization of past
events.  Cut to chase - publish all of this - not just the selected
extracts.  

Let's stop this hiding behind private lists.

Stephen.



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


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

 If I remember correctly you coined the phrase, and now you are promoting
 this left right and center presumably as your rationalization of past
 events.  Cut to chase - publish all of this - not just the selected
 extracts.

Actually, I was just checking some of the archives.  Aaron may have coined
it in this context.  Or he just quoted me from a message I don't have handy.
It doesn't really matter.

I'm not sure what events you feel I'm rationalizing, since I was one of the
increasingly few who was interested in seeing Merlin have a home at the ASF.

 Let's stop this hiding behind private lists.

Assuming that no one objected to making the content public, you'd have to
find someone with the time to vet the archive contents.  I have no idea who
has such time.

--- Noel


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread David Crossley
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
  Niclas Hedhman wrote:
   Noel J. Bergman wrote:
   Actually, all it takes to veto a change is one PMC member to cast a -1
   with a technical justification.  The issue is how a community deals with
   those vetos, and how progress can be made by resolving them.
  
   So, please bring to the table a particular case, since I fail to recall
   any such veto being ignored and/or not worked on to be resolved, other
   than the mentioned Leo Simons' (was he even PMC at the time? still not
   ignored.) one, which got caught up in a larger mess.
 
  Out of simple curiousity, what would this accomplish?  
 
 That FUD is prevalent in ASF establishment, against its own contributors, for 
 unknown reasons, possibly unintentionally, by an unnamed, possibly unknown, 
 person or a group of persons. And that FUD is being amplified by everyone 
 else into facts, and *I* definately don't like these kind of patterns.

It isn't present, so please stop spreading it.

Rather send patches to the www.apache.org/foundation/
and /dev/ procedural documents which you feel are obscure.
That is the normal community way.

--David

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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 20 December 2004 22:16
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  Maybe it's about dealing with the breach of procedure by the Chair
of a
  PMC and ensuring that this does not get rewarded nor repeated.
 
 Once again, there was no technical breach of procedure.  Of custom,
 perhaps, but not of procedure.  This is another dead horse that
 should stop getting beaten.  

A set of polices and procedures were established and these procedures
governing the decision making processes within the Avalon PMC.  These
policies established rules concerning discussion, voting, and reporting.
Unfortunately Aaron decided that he was above these rules, a notion
supported by the Chairman and a number of the members of the board.

There is absolute indisputable evidence of Aaron disregard for these
procedures and the opinion of the PMC. Lets' not even argue about that.
Instead I would suggest you think about the impact of these actions on
the PMC members and the community. The breakdown in trust underpins the
subject of this thread and every single person subscribed to this list
is better off for knowing that.  So instead of defending the ASF - how
about thinking about strengthening what you have by at least listening
and perhaps suggesting ways in which we can prevent this in the future.

Stephen.




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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 05:30
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
   Stephen McConnell wrote:
 * What do you think is the role of a PMC in our decision
   making process?
   They have absolute decision making process within the board's
   mandate for their project.
 
  According to Greg Stein this should not be the case.  Greg holds to
the
  opinion that the appointed Chair is the PMC and that the members are
  simply an artificial construct.
 
  I should point out that Greg's position seems to contradict section
6.3
  of the bylaws in that it is stated that a PMC is a committee with a
  designated chairman.  The bylaws also seem to clearly state that the
  committee is responsible for active management.
 
 Actually, it says that the that the PMC shall consist of at least one
 officer of the corporation, who shall be designated the PMC Chair, and
who
 shall be primarily responsible for project(s) managed by such
committee,
 and he or she shall establish rules and procedures for the day to day
 management of project(s) for which the committee is responsible.

And as a PMC Member you would be completely familiar with the rules and
procedures of the day to day management.

http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/avalon/site/central/community/process/pm
c/procedures.html


  [The PMC Chair] actively and publicly took actions without
consulting
  the Avalon PMC and on at least one occasion justified this on the
  grounds that the PMC would not agree with his position.
 
 Aaron consulted with the PMC on every occasion that I can recall.  

Interestingly - you were actually there when he said that!  

 In the
 case of migrating Phoenix to SVN, you can hardly claim that he made a
 unilateral decision.  Probably more than anyone, I am the resident
 pain-in-arse about preserving ALL history, which I consider a
corporate
 asset.  And I am absolutely unapologetic about
 
a) the lack of accountability of the Chair towards the committee
b) the reluctance of the Board to properly recognize the PMC as
   the responsible entity
 
 You raised similar issues in the past.  If it comes down to it, the
 Membership owns the Foundation.  The Foundation is run for the Public
Good
 as best we can, and those who demonstrate merit are invited to become
 Members, Officers and Directors.

If this is the best that the foundation can do or is this the simpler
scenario of an organization incapable of looking at the facts and asking
itself if it couldn't do better?

  a committee should have the ability to remove a chair
 
 The PMC lacks the authority to do so.  

Which is why it was presented as a recommendation! Do you see an
inherent problem with the notion of a Chair accountable to the
committee?  

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Brian W. Fitzpatrick
On Dec 20, 2004, at 10:39 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:31:03 +0100, Stephen McConnell
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK - let's play this game but let's do it properly.
I've got a better idea ... let's not play the game (any more) at all.
The decision was made (and I, as an Apache member, consider it to be
in *my* best interest, as well as in the best interest of the ASF).
It's done.  It's over.  It's now an off topic conversation for this
list.
If you guys had put the same amount of energy into your software that
you put into your arguments, the world really would have been a better
place as a result of your efforts.
A huge +1.  If anyone taking part in this thread thinks they're going 
to change anyone else's opinion about what happened around Avalon, 
they're massively deluded.

Take it to alt.talk.wank for crissakes.
-Fitz
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz
Le 21 déc. 04, à 08:21, Brian W. Fitzpatrick a écrit :
Take it to alt.talk.wank for crissakes.
+1
-Bertrand


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Henning Schmiedehausen
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 05:02, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 If there's a reasonable reason, cool.  Otherwise, maybe we can move
 on.  There'll be no 'winner' here.

But we could proclaim Stephen and Niclas winner. Maybe this thread
would end then and then we all would win...

Regards
Henning

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen  INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]+49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/
 
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for hire
   Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development

Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
 fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
 position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
 is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
 deserves to be on this list of the top five problems.
   --Michelle Levesque, Fundamental Issues with
Open Source Software Development


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Henning Schmiedehausen
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 05:39, Craig McClanahan wrote:
 On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 05:31:03 +0100, Stephen McConnell
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
  OK - let's play this game but let's do it properly.
  
 
 I've got a better idea ... let's not play the game (any more) at all.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/quotes#qt0077889

Can't agree more. Can we just lay this thread to rest? Stephen and
Niclas can open up www.avalonconspiracy.com and the rest goes on with
life.

Regards
Henning

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen  INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]+49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/
 
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for hire
   Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development

Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
 fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
 position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
 is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
 deserves to be on this list of the top five problems.
   --Michelle Levesque, Fundamental Issues with
Open Source Software Development


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Nicola Ken Barozzi
Craig McClanahan wrote:
...
If you guys had put the same amount of energy into your software that
you put into your arguments, the world really would have been a better
place as a result of your efforts.
+1  (@see my mantra below... what I want to accomplish,
 what unfortunatly I still fail to do)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
-
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 11:43:14AM +0800, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 On Tuesday 21 December 2004 11:19, Stephen McConnell wrote:
  Greg holds to the
  opinion that the appointed Chair is the PMC and that the members are
  simply an artificial construct.
 
 Before anyone is requesting the quote where Steve get that notion from;
 http://www.apache.org/~niclas/irc/2004-05-15.022554.txt
 
 which is an IRC session regarding the fork/transfer/something of Phoenix to 
 James, via an SVN import into Avalon's SVN space. Everyone is aware that this 
 IRC session is logged and available to the public (before people hammer for 
 that.).
 
 Following quotes from Greg Stein (and one McConnell);
 (12:10:11) gstein: mcconnell: aaron *is* the PMC
 ((12:46:05) gstein: the members of the PMC is an artificial construct created 
 by the Chair
 12:48:15) gstein: mcconnell: the board expects a PMC to operate in a 
 consensus 
 fashion,
 (12:48:38) gstein: but when a PMC *cannot* operate in a consensus fashion, 
 then the Board leaves it to the Chair to figure out the right solution.
 (12:52:47) gstein: if Aaron wants to ask the PMC, then he can.
 (12:57:17) mcconnell: then don't ask aaron for an opinion because aaron has 
 not talked with his PMC MEMBERS
 (12:57:29) gstein: mcconnell: doesn't matter to me. that's up to him.
 
 
 In my personal opinion that also seems to suggest that committer and/or PMC 
 vetoes are also of no interest. The PMC Chair is an ultimate decision maker 
 (at least in the view of Greg), who from time to time decides how to deal 
 with disagreements.

You lost a lot of context there. The main thing: I was speaking from
the position of the Board/Director/Chairman. Doesn't matter to me what
is on the other side of Aaron. From the Board's standpoint, it's all
about Aaron.

And yes, the Chair defines the rules/procedures. And when they fail to
keep the project and community on track, then the Chair can change the
rules. Simple as that.

The Chair is an officer of the corporation in charge of some of our
assets and in charge of the community which cares for those assets. We
expect that officer to look out for the best interests of the ASF. And
if that requires a hard call, then so be it. We *expect* a
consensus-based approach, but when that doesn't work or it fails in
some way, then we *expect* that the Chair will solve it. If a Chair
runs rampantly against either of those expectations, then the Board
will deal with it. That certainly wasn't the case here. Aaron did
well, and I fully support his actions, both personally as a developer
and an ASF Member, and also as a Director of the Board and Chairman of
the ASF.

There have certainly been insinuations in this thread and others that
my positions or stances are part of the problem. You're certainly
entitled to that point of view, but I'm similarly confident that I
have been acting in the best interests of the ASF in this matter, and
that I have the support of the Membership. I may not have unanimous
support, and I certainly don't in all matters, but in this regard, I
feel pretty good that I've been representing the Members (and, thus,
the ASF) properly.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Greg Stein
On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 07:21:09AM +0100, Stephen McConnell wrote:
...
   a committee should have the ability to remove a chair
  
  The PMC lacks the authority to do so.  
 
 Which is why it was presented as a recommendation! Do you see an
 inherent problem with the notion of a Chair accountable to the
 committee?  

It would not establish the necessary paths of responsibility and
oversight necessary for the proper and legal operation of the ASf.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Greg Stein
FYI:

The avalon-pmc archives are fully available to ASF Members. For those
who are done poking forks in their eyes, and would like something only
a bit less painful, then you can review the threads which talk about
attrition or nazi in the 200403 archive.

Cheers,
-g

On Tue, Dec 21, 2004 at 12:04:42AM -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  If I remember correctly you coined the phrase, and now you are promoting
  this left right and center presumably as your rationalization of past
  events.  Cut to chase - publish all of this - not just the selected
  extracts.
 
 Actually, I was just checking some of the archives.  Aaron may have coined
 it in this context.  Or he just quoted me from a message I don't have handy.
 It doesn't really matter.
 
 I'm not sure what events you feel I'm rationalizing, since I was one of the
 increasingly few who was interested in seeing Merlin have a home at the ASF.
 
  Let's stop this hiding behind private lists.
 
 Assuming that no one objected to making the content public, you'd have to
 find someone with the time to vet the archive contents.  I have no idea who
 has such time.
 
   --- Noel

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr
On Dec 21, 2004, at 3:23 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
On Tue, 2004-12-21 at 05:02, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
If there's a reasonable reason, cool.  Otherwise, maybe we can move
on.  There'll be no 'winner' here.
But we could proclaim Stephen and Niclas winner. Maybe this thread
would end then and then we all would win...
Henning - thanks - this is much better than ruining another Roxy Music 
song for me...

:D
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr  +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Dirk-Willem van Gulik


On Tue, 21 Dec 2004, Niclas Hedhman wrote:

 The PMC Chair is an ultimate decision maker

Please check the bylaws for the normal situation.

But -WHEN- things break down, when there is no consensus and there is no
clear ability to reach any conclusion and it is in the interest of the
foundation because damage is done then the board expects the chair to act
as an officer of the foundation and clean things up. Note that at this
point the board has already been made well aware of the sitution and is
actively monitoring the chair.

Note that at -every- step in that process anyone can appeal to the board
to bring things to our attention, to get us to suspend things, replace the
chair, whatever. And you can count on us to act very swiftly and without
hesitation is truly damaging things are happening which affect the ASF as
a whole (say when knowingly shipping code without a license).  However be
warned that in most cases our only options are effectively to suspend the
entire project.

In the Avalon case we did no such drastic things but waited for months
(well years really) for the community to get a grip, consensus.

Dw

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:

 A practice of asking people to leave, or trying to drive them away, because
 they don't agree with you is not acceptable.
 
 It is a single occurrence in time, and in my book everyone is allowed to make 
 occassional mistakes. You make them, I make them, everyone makes them.
 I think the difference of Hey, Steve that is not acceptable! warning, to a 
 categorical character assassination across the ASF is a bit much.

No, I don't think it was a single occurrence.  And there you go again with
another highly charged term.  What's interesting is that *you're* the one
that keeps associating Stephen's name with this stuff.  The only time I
mentioned him by name was when I was correcting the mistake about
authority.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcgeGZrNPMCpn3XdAQEX3gQA3tcndccabAQ0V1BdUc75iGjwzv36hAuL
kCp+eViD+klUy6Dq0uKiQjTVP1RkPl9fkY2tL0nMDVHfDFerlRQJPyUVfJ+iG/H/
EfuF5u3o2Bd61BAn4kptYzrUdaTdVyOhyTD77fh4XV1OFTDUQveIlk07zIHn1vnb
W7dW2kQAQ0I=
=9cnj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 
 That FUD is prevalent in ASF establishment, against its own contributors, for 
 unknown reasons, possibly unintentionally, by an unnamed, possibly unknown, 
 person or a group of persons. And that FUD is being amplified by everyone 
 else into facts, and *I* definately don't like these kind of patterns.

The only FUD I see here is that which you yourself are spreading.  I and
others are stating facts and personal opinions; you are the one waving around
the conspiracy theories.

 I think there is procedural value of walking through what have happened. A 
 bit 
 of transparency among how this organization is run vs how it states it is 
 run.

How it is run and how it is stated to have been run are one and the same.
That's my opinion, and apparently the opinion of the vast majority of
people involved and observing.  Just because the results don't align with
anyone's personal preferences does not make that equation false, nor
invalidate either one componment or the other.

 I would hope that the Board has an interest in that scrutiny of its 
 actions is regularly exercised, to clear its honorable members of any 
 misdoings, doesn't it?

Scrutiny, yes.  Repeated baseless polemic is not interesting.  Scrutiny
involves examining something to see what's going on.  It does not mean
going in with preconceived notions and the intent to do nothing but
find information supportive of them.

You don't seem the least bit interested in scrutinising anything.  You
seem solely interested in trying to convince the readership that your
view is the only true one, and that your desired outcome didn't come
about because it was thwarted by some evil cabal of secret conspirators.

Maybe that's not what you're trying to do, but it's sure how it's coming
across to me.  'Mandate'; 'FUD'; 'character assassination'; the specific
situation under discussion being inflated to 'FUD is prevalent in ASF
establishment' -- sheesh.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcggnZrNPMCpn3XdAQFD6AP+J+wGAja6Lw+wbel9xbDwppRfKj1OPYjU
7N8yAkDqTiLb3oLuZ15x5s/IYE96j0vHeKHyo6iIHb1Q8RX2byAA5aLs1HpSFyt6
T2xhfFMMb7YF+Rq5L+pOS4J+yq2DtOsuhZDquly4+HOHZQiC7JlF16F6i7MZya5Q
bWfHAG7xsY4=
=SA41
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 
 Since you ask me so harshly to keep under the lid what the exchange was in 
 the 
 coming mails, I can apparently not clarify where the 'solution path' led to, 
 can I?

This is such complete BS I'm almost speechless.  You turn 'ask before posting'
into 'harshly asking you to keep under the lid.'  And you can't explain what
solution *you* proposed without quoting *me*?

And if you proposed a solution, why are you also claiming that I would never
support the unsolved arrangement?  You can't have it both ways.

 Yet IMNSHO the establishment of the Excalibur TLP was more balkanization 
 along 
 people than technology, than the establishment of a Merlin/Metro TLP. So why 
 did that happen? 

Um, because other people disagree with your interpretation?
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcghZ5rNPMCpn3XdAQF7HAP/Um5GFfLsbFVbgSfpr52Ns4m8nNgMw156
//C9yrgfjgRNIGHbU5xD4DCCnZTt+mVLspwvNaiAMfv8F7FBQrRJX2TNJ021nIRr
IiqmkBEuRvlj54YgKGnHrv178RMQszxG0qYsKs5Ov521WLIDCsxan4K+WTGlm4Sf
byCzMCe/IFE=
=xoxa
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 OK - let's play this game but let's do it properly.  

I don't intend to touch this remark.

 Open up the Avalon PMC archives and let's really get down to real metal
 and in the process I think we will clean up more that a couple of
 popular misconceptions.  In fact publishing this stuff would be in best
 interests of the foundation - unless of course somebody has something to
 hide, and surely, that's not the case, not here.

As has been pointed out, the PMC archives are open to any and all ASF
members.  They can examine them and draw their own conclusions.  If
any members do so, and feel that I, Noel, Greg -- or Niclas or Stephen --
or anyone else -- is misrepresenting things, I dearly hope they will
speak up and say, 'my examination of the PMC mail archives shows me that
the support *x* and don't support *y*.'
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcgiS5rNPMCpn3XdAQHZZwP/WfkbfdUSAmrTaM+WmeIaQMDkaHR1F8sS
gdmohwVjJvXi8XrVdAyWB2CzH4nrYtZ3BU1kIImupFpl6gyZOZJsD6Qd4cUrf0Zt
SAtrOMvLQ/7TwU1BmEwS1MEveN9HUPE8l30KN6om13zr2OuDTQAxZBDiUvFVCeso
QcYoBXdUmFM=
=pvu2
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 20:59, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 No, I don't think it was a single occurrence.  

*I* only know of one such time, in conjunction with Leo Sutic resigning on the 
basis of People leaving because they don't agree with the majority opinion 
is acceptable attrition. 

 And there you go again with another highly charged term.  

Everything else you call hand waving. ;o)

 What's interesting is that *you're* the one
 that keeps associating Stephen's name with this stuff.  The only time I
 mentioned him by name was when I was correcting the mistake about
 authority.

Come on, I somehow get the feeling that you are trying to toy me around with 
your intellect and wit of words. I buy you a beer over that, no problem.

I won't drag this on, since you feel like the cat playing with the mouse, so 
the mouse has now decided eat me, and lays down in front of the cat, 
awaiting it to loose interest ;o)

BUT, I *would* appreciate if you spent some of your intellect looking at the 
more important stuff raised in this thread under new Subject.


Cheers
Niclas

P.S. Every Sanagendamgagwedweinini on Google refers back to you. Is this some 
marker to all your doings on the web?

-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:

 Once again, there was no technical breach of procedure.  Of custom,
 perhaps, but not of procedure.  This is another dead horse that
 should stop getting beaten.

 A set of polices and procedures were established and these procedures
 governing the decision making processes within the Avalon PMC.  These
 policies established rules concerning discussion, voting, and reporting.
 Unfortunately Aaron decided that he was above these rules, a notion
 supported by the Chairman and a number of the members of the board.

No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the ASF.
Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.

 There is absolute indisputable evidence of Aaron disregard for these
 procedures and the opinion of the PMC. Lets' not even argue about that.

I believe there may have been disagreement between Aaron and some
members of the PMC.  Certainly not a majority, in which case the
statement 'Aaron disregarded the opinion of the PMC' is just a handwave.
If the entire PMC wanted a different approach taken, or even a majority
did, then perhaps your assertion migh be consodered to have some validity.

In addition, 'disregard' means 'ignore' -- which is not the same as
'considering but not choosing to accept.'  So I *do* dispute your claims.
'Let's not argue' ?  Then let's stop asserting controversial positions
and saying they're fact and not worth arguing about.

 Instead I would suggest you think about the impact of these actions on
 the PMC members and the community. The breakdown in trust underpins the
 subject of this thread and every single person subscribed to this list
 is better off for knowing that.  So instead of defending the ASF - how
 about thinking about strengthening what you have by at least listening
 and perhaps suggesting ways in which we can prevent this in the future.

If I believed there was something improper here that should be prevented
in the future, aye.  Since I don't, then defending the ASF, and the positions
taken which I consider correct and valid, is certainly preferable to
*not* defending them and letting assertions I consider rubbish to prevail
unchallenged and by default.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcglvprNPMCpn3XdAQHibQP/fqSwoVRXcgcOVotP2nprlHd/TPbenhop
hcJTFA1I/wzQxsNHpYCfeugzcQsLfBLNwGxl3g4iiFOUMb+me+kuRbJyy12ej7Nd
eeBKcaBAW8JiOaMlSGaJPWsrRFlu8X/iEolaVMk6lrs7N8nB2eyrDnuaeR90RUGi
fpq3v8j171c=
=Hkmc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 
 BUT, I *would* appreciate if you spent some of your intellect looking at the 
 more important stuff raised in this thread under new Subject.

(I don't see any new thread yet.)  If the stuff is raised as hypothetical
issues, sure.  I'll attempt to be critical and unbiased as I always try
(sometimes woefully unsuccessfully) to be.

 P.S. Every Sanagendamgagwedweinini on Google refers back to you. Is this some 
 marker to all your doings on the web?

It's in my .sig and on my Web pages.  AFAIK, no-one else ever uses that
word.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcgnnprNPMCpn3XdAQEfBAQA1aHEKi6j5Yn9Du/JXCTIqLexKNuKlmHs
0p//HAKo8/MS9841D7P7TDoC+S/hP6QjyItgCWbYl1N2HVH9NclmOmNCpchC+EYw
5M2dVbgRcGREd+PSZqUMVaBqfzz0SB03/xMTu9aW25tItIw/Sw8V/gVAN7Hwf60f
nwYwrL+KoUM=
=PGA0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 21:39, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 (I don't see any new thread yet.)
Same thread, new Subject


Subject = Requesting clarification in ByLaw text.

-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 14:32
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  Once again, there was no technical breach of procedure.  Of custom,
  perhaps, but not of procedure.  This is another dead horse that
  should stop getting beaten.
 
  A set of polices and procedures were established and these
procedures
  governing the decision making processes within the Avalon PMC.
These
  policies established rules concerning discussion, voting, and
reporting.
  Unfortunately Aaron decided that he was above these rules, a notion
  supported by the Chairman and a number of the members of the board.
 
 No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the ASF.
 Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.

Then clearly you have been negligent in your responsibility towards the
Avalon community.  If the Avalon policies are invalid - why did the
Chairman not say so?  Why did *you* remain silent?  Why did every member
of the board choose to sit or their thumbs?  Explain how your selective
and timely prose contribute to the proper running of this organization?

Authority without accountability?

I'm could imagine why you and other members of the board feel
comfortable with this.  Make a chair accountable to the committee and
the next thing you know will be board accountability to chairs.  Oh god
- would that send a rocket up the darker passages of the ASF!

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr .
On Dec 21, 2004, at 2:02 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Authority without accountability?
I'm could imagine why you and other members of the board feel
comfortable with this.  Make a chair accountable to the committee and
the next thing you know will be board accountability to chairs.  Oh god
- would that send a rocket up the darker passages of the ASF!
I realize that this is little more than a filibuster, and I probably 
should be smacked for feeding *this* troll, but I'm a board member, I 
voted for pushing Avalon over the side, and wonder why you believe that 
we could invert the oversight structure?  Would the membership then be 
accountable to the board?

We are structured to provide demonstrable oversight of the organization 
on behalf of the membership.  We are accountable to the membership.  We 
are elected by the membership, and can be thrown out, singly or en 
masse, by the membership.

To that end, the board is charged with establishing PMCs, which are 
managed by an officer of the corporation, the PMC Chair.  This person 
has the right to make decisions on behalf of the corporation (being an 
officer) that he or she considers to be in the best interest of the 
corporation.

Where's the problem?
geir
(For the record, I support the actions of the board in this matter, and 
specifically, Greg's explanation of how things work...)

--
Geir Magnusson Jr  +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 20:13
 To: community@apache.org
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 
 On Dec 21, 2004, at 2:02 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  Authority without accountability?
 
  I'm could imagine why you and other members of the board feel
  comfortable with this.  Make a chair accountable to the committee
and
  the next thing you know will be board accountability to chairs.  Oh
god
  - would that send a rocket up the darker passages of the ASF!
 
 I realize that this is little more than a filibuster, and I probably
 should be smacked for feeding *this* troll

*smack*

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the ASF.
 Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.
 
 Then clearly you have been negligent in your responsibility towards the
 Avalon community.

No more than, say, the federal government is to citizens of a state
when that state passes laws that encroach on federal authority.  I.e.,
not at all.  Things stand until they're tested.

Bravo, Stephen; you've now competely and utterly convinced me that
you're an accomplished troll.  It's evidently impossible to hold a
reasoned discussion with you.  Apparently you're not the least bit
interested in Truth; all you're interested in is Being Right.  Or
so it seems to me.

Until you demonstrate that you can at least attempt dispassion and
objectivity, I don't intend to waste any more of my time responding
to your trolls.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQch3t5rNPMCpn3XdAQHDBwP9HYWo/pIr7dR4snGdjdykQLQxSN3ckKU7
5PjkhVerfI9kaCNmQrQT4s68W2G3EYhnOBtl1P8CBORXoKN0n7t+XZiK8uZgL1Jj
twNWT2yi9JYyRf7G864dUkmBcHB7df804X6plAr8wBZEgz/Wl/vttJTKm5uUDrKH
OY/FD7+8pao=
=UPvh
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 I realize that this is little more than a filibuster, and I probably
 should be smacked for feeding *this* troll
 
 *smack*
 
 Stephen.

Excellent, Geir!  Reponding to Stephen, you 'should be smacked for
feeding the troll.'  Stephen himself smacked you.  Ergo, Stephen
evidently agrees that you're feeding a troll, and, since you were
reponding to him, he's the one trolling.

ROTFLMAO! grin
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQch4zprNPMCpn3XdAQFU2AQAge0bLCMS6ScqzIIHzRUrhOKnFEfhTXYd
WOC/axZyODxMDQYET6nYwZqE5hu8sGH5DOwyk5pIADPd6oC9YjeAn8i64NnWMAtD
CisVLQhe47cnR3yFIpzcaERhIHOGIKkh7lvwWapNSIPgkjmDz6bomdwQvSgSRjdj
7DMlvYpa1J8=
=qDFJ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 20:22
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the
ASF.
  Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.
 
  Then clearly you have been negligent in your responsibility towards
the
  Avalon community.
 
 No more than, say, the federal government is to citizens of a state
 when that state passes laws that encroach on federal authority.  I.e.,
 not at all.  Things stand until they're tested.
 
 Bravo, Stephen; you've now competely and utterly convinced me that
 you're an accomplished troll.  It's evidently impossible to hold a
 reasoned discussion with you.  Apparently you're not the least bit
 interested in Truth; all you're interested in is Being Right.  Or
 so it seems to me.
 
 Until you demonstrate that you can at least attempt dispassion and
 objectivity, I don't intend to waste any more of my time responding
 to your trolls.

Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion within
this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
decision.

Stephen.


 - --
 #ken  P-)}
 
 Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
 Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/
 
 Millennium hand and shrimp!
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
 iQCVAwUBQch3t5rNPMCpn3XdAQHDBwP9HYWo/pIr7dR4snGdjdykQLQxSN3ckKU7
 5PjkhVerfI9kaCNmQrQT4s68W2G3EYhnOBtl1P8CBORXoKN0n7t+XZiK8uZgL1Jj
 twNWT2yi9JYyRf7G864dUkmBcHB7df804X6plAr8wBZEgz/Wl/vttJTKm5uUDrKH
 OY/FD7+8pao=
 =UPvh
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 20:22
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  No policy adopted by a project can supercede the policies of the 
  ASF. Any that do are null and void, or, at best, advisory only.
 
  Then clearly you have been negligent in your responsibility towards 
  the Avalon community.
 
 No more than, say, the federal government is to citizens of a state 
 when that state passes laws that encroach on federal authority.  I.e.,

 not at all.  Things stand until they're tested.
 
 Bravo, Stephen; you've now competely and utterly convinced me that 
 you're an accomplished troll.  It's evidently impossible to hold a 
 reasoned discussion with you.  Apparently you're not the least bit 
 interested in Truth; all you're interested in is Being Right.  Or so 
 it seems to me.
 
 Until you demonstrate that you can at least attempt dispassion and 
 objectivity, I don't intend to waste any more of my time responding to

 your trolls.

Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion within
this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
decision.

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Scott Sanders

Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion within
this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
decision.
Stephen.
 

Stephen,
As one of the usually-silent members of the ASF, I take exception to 
what you have said in most of this thread.  If there is anything wrong 
with the policies and procedures of the ASF, it is that Avalon was not 
shut down in 2001 or before.  The board tried and tried and tried to 
stay out of the problems, hoping that the Avalon PMC would 
self-correct.  This did not happen.  Avalon was shut down.  IMHO, it 
should have happened long before you became a major player in Avalon.  
Avalon has historically forgot about the 'users' part of the community, 
and that is something that I am not willing to let continue.  I fully 
support the decisions made by the Avalon PMC to shut the project down.

I find it a bit ironic that a 'perfect framework' project takes on a 
named based on a mythically perfect community, and the community is 
anything but.

I would 'commend and applaud' your acceptance that there is an equal and 
opposite viewpoint to yours on this issue.  I also believe that the 
multiple opinions out there cannot be reconciled.  I am willing to let 
it go at that, as there is no clear direction forward, since forward has 
a dozen meanings in this context. So why don't we drop it?

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


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Serge Knystautas
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion within
this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
decision.
consent by attrition
--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech  software . strategy . design  http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Wednesday 22 December 2004 03:54, Scott Sanders wrote:
 If there is anything wrong
 with the policies and procedures of the ASF, it is that Avalon was not
 shut down in 2001 or before.  

I have spent most of the evening reading mails pre-Avalon TLP and especially 
the period around the TLP was formed, and I must agree the Scott. It was 
infected way back.

 I would 'commend and applaud' your acceptance that there is an equal and
 opposite viewpoint to yours on this issue.  

That has been identified and is acknowledged. I am now asking the question 
that there is a disparity between the way Greg explains how it works and the 
way projects operates. I have for instance brought up the PMC ByLaws issue, 
which doesn't exist but many projects have.


 I also believe that the
 multiple opinions out there cannot be reconciled.  I am willing to let
 it go at that, as there is no clear direction forward, since forward has
 a dozen meanings in this context. So why don't we drop it?

I have dropped Avalon out of the picture, that is history. I learned that 
being a member of the PMC is not necessarily what you think it is. Why not 
make the roles clear? Why not make sure that PMCs who has ByLaws, take those 
down and replace with Operational Procedures and Practices, which 
accurately describes the chain of command that *are* in place at project 
level, but barely mentioned anywhere?
Why not make sure that no more TLPs are created with a boiler text, speaking 
of these project bylaws?


If everyone thinks this is at all not necessary, then fine do nothing about 
it, let the descrepancy continue to exist, and I'll predict similar problems 
sooner, rather than later, in the future.



Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

 Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
 disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
 an open community.

Rather, you are not willing to see that despite the ASF's utopian ideals, we
recognize in our legal construct that things may not always have a utopian
existence, and we provide for handling such (happily uncommon) cases.

--- Noel


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there is a
 disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the functioning of
 an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
 address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion within
 this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
 decision.

Last message on this: None of the above is clear.  You are guilty out
of your own mouth/keyboard of ascribing to others -- in this case me --
the motivations you want to believe they have.  Your paragraph above
demonstrates yet again that you will twist anything you can to support
your position.

By refraining from trying to deal with you further I am in no way
suggesting that I believe you to be correct.  Disengaging from a debate
does not equate to giving up and accepting the other side's argument.

And to specifically and explicitly give the lie to your assertions above,
Stephen, I will gladly discuss any of the named issues with anyone capable
of doing so reasonably.  I just no longer consider that to include you.  I
am not 'abstaining from further discussion' on them -- I am abstaining from
attempting to discuss them with *you*.  So go ahead and find someone else
who supports your position, and can participate in reasonable discussion,
and get that person to engage me on those topics right here on this list.
Go ahead and feed that person lines behind the scenes if you like, to make
sure that you feel you're being represented.  But don't bother trying to
represent yourself any more, at least not to me -- you have reduced your
own credibility to less than zero in my opinion through your choice of
tactics.
- --
#kenP-(}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQciNtJrNPMCpn3XdAQG7LQP9FZ6LRQNv3kd/Bj/1S9ilsDgoykkoFnpD
+GNxdjgGilmAvUkhjscKM9/vr4SCczE0Dfbz69MEjKg8k5BQ9NdYl4z+N9iTyyJn
A/zSHpbNIS8Ok3nNslo/V12TR67T7xBDNKP40gmiRaYQITjDC+0boniAYEMa4sYU
GUnRYwEsTIE=
=3ywN
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-21 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Rodent of Unusual Size [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 21 December 2004 21:55
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  Clearly you are not prepared to face up to the fact that the there
is a
  disconnect within the ASF policies and procedures and the
functioning of
  an open community.  Clearly you are not prepared, willing or able to
  address this.  You decision to abstain from further discussion
within
  this context is an appropriate move and I commend and applaud this
  decision.
 
 Last message on this: None of the above is clear.  You are guilty out
 of your own mouth/keyboard of ascribing to others -- in this case me
--
 the motivations you want to believe they have.  Your paragraph above
 demonstrates yet again that you will twist anything you can to support
 your position.
 
 By refraining from trying to deal with you further I am in no way
 suggesting that I believe you to be correct.  Disengaging from a
debate
 does not equate to giving up and accepting the other side's argument.
 
 And to specifically and explicitly give the lie to your assertions
above,
 Stephen, I will gladly discuss any of the named issues with anyone
capable
 of doing so reasonably.  I just no longer consider that to include
you.  I
 am not 'abstaining from further discussion' on them -- I am abstaining
 from
 attempting to discuss them with *you*.  So go ahead and find someone
else
 who supports your position, and can participate in reasonable
discussion,
 and get that person to engage me on those topics right here on this
list.
 Go ahead and feed that person lines behind the scenes if you like, to
make
 sure that you feel you're being represented.  But don't bother trying
to
 represent yourself any more, at least not to me -- you have reduced
your
 own credibility to less than zero in my opinion through your choice of
 tactics.

Sooner of later you have to make a choice.  Are you a part of the pile
or are your going to do something about the pile.  It appears that you
have made that decision.

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Serge Knystautas
Stephen McConnell wrote:
I've tried to stay out of this thread(s), but I just have to say, 
give me a break.  James was one of Avalon's most visible users, and 
I simply cannot stand to hear someone from Avalon criticize the ASF 
establishment about the treatment of Avalon users.
Perhaps it could be argued that the following list positions James as a
visible user of dead, never released, unreproducible, redundant and
unsupported technology?  I couldn't say.  But I would like to know if
this is what you meant by the ASF establishment taking care of the James
community?
Stephen,
This is a straw man argument, because this is completely unrelated to my 
primary point, which was that nobody had malicious intentions.  It also 
implies that had the board allowed you to create your TLC or Aaron 
hadn't shutdown Avalon, James would have had a better set of dependencies.

But I'll play along for a moment.
Projects have layers of responsibility.  You, as a primary actor in the 
Avalon community, failed and are largely to blame for James' dependency 
situation.  Since you failed, Aaron had a responsibility as PMC chair to 
do something, and he should be sainted for what he did.

Had Aaron failed, the board would had the opportunity to act, and had we 
reached that point, I could have made a judgement on whether the 
nefarious they were taking care of the James community.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man]
Can we start a new mailing list called [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 
somehow redirect all avalon-related emails to that?

--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech  software . strategy . design  http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Niclas Hedhman

[fixed-width font required]

Serge,
I disagree with your assessment that You [Steve], as a primary actor in the 
Avalon community, failed...

1. Steve is accused of becoming the primary actor of late, when the other 
primary actors, like Peter Donald, Berin Loritsch, Nicola Ken Barozzi, Paul 
Hammant, Stefano Mazzocchi (I probably left a few out), had left, i.e. 
towards the later part of 2003.

2. So, let's re-examine the history of WHEN the James entropy sets in, i.e. 
what has been 'killed' at which point in time;


Dates in parenthesis, is the last trace I can find of it. 
+++ means possibly not rebuildable from source, as I have not been able to 
locate the source directories in CVS history, only deleted Jars in the 
Phoenix project.

Prior to Mid-2003 (i.e. before I was heavily involved)
excalibur-baxter-1.0a.jar   DEAD+++  (27 Dec 2002)
phoenix-client.jar  DEAD+++  ( 4 Apr 2003 )
phoenix-bsh-commands.jarDEAD ( 2 Mar 2003 )
excalibur-threadcontext-1.0.jar DEAD+++  (28 Feb 2003)
excalibur-containerkit-1.0.jar  DEAD+++  (27 Dec 2002)
excalibur-extension-1.0a.jarDEAD+++  (28 Feb 2003)


These were repackaged into a compatibility deliverable, somewhere prior to 
mid-2003, and handed over to the Excalibur TLP under a 
excalibur-compatibility artifact/jar;
excalibur-cli-1.0.jar   REPLACE BY COMMONS CLI
excalibur-collections-1.0.jar   DEAD
excalibur-io-1.1.jarREPLACE BY COMMONS IO
excalibur-concurrent-1.0.jarDEAD



During the period when I was actively monitoring, and later committer, in the 
Avalon project and Steve a primary actor.
   none   *


In the Excalibur TLP after taking over the code.
excalibur-i18n-1.0.jar  DEAD (No longer in source repository)
excalibur-configuration-1.0.jar DEPRICATED
excalibur-util-1.0.jar  DEAD (No longer in source repository)
excalibur-compatibility DEAD (No longer in source repository)
containing the concurrent,cli,io and
collections.

Indecisive;
excalibur-instrument-0.1.jarNEVER RELEASED
(I would say that is due to Steve and
 my lack of interest in excalibur
 codebase.)

cornerstone.jar UNRELEASED  UNREPRODUCABLE
(Unreproducable due to missing version,
 even no snapshot id. Would have been
 released in due time.)


Furthermore, the entire Excalibur codebase was not buildable when I came into 
the Avalon project. I and Stephen spent a few weeks to get it to build, and 
another few weeks to get Gump to build it. We had no interest in that 
codebase per se. We just 'collaborated'.


NOW, for the Record, I get very upset when I look at the above, and that the 
we (Stephen McConnell  myself) are accused of;
1. Not collaborating and unable to compromise.
2. Not being concerned of other ASF users, such as Cocoon and James.
3. Not taking care of Avalon legacy.
4. Consensus by Attrition.


To me it is more a matter of those who started Excalibur gave up on it, 
deserted the user base, and managed to blame someone else (Steve and perhaps 
me). As soon as the (basically) same group of primary actors, Berin  Peter, 
regains their 'position' (i.e. Excalibur TLP) further axing of the legacy is 
done, without much regards for projects like Cocoon and James.

You really think that we consider that fair judgement?

I assume, that most of the judgement passed on Steve from respectable people 
like yourself, is only amplified FUD created and propagated by people who are 
in disagreement with Steve on how Merlin should have been evolved. I can't 
see any other explanation... Tragic!

 Can we start a new mailing list called [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
 somehow redirect all avalon-related emails to that?

Well, some people are interested in history and justice even if it is 
superficial. ( Oh, I forgot, I have the right to remain silent... Go straight 
to jail without passing GO. )

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Friday 17 December 2004 00:13, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
 Well, actually the dictionary does:
 http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=attrition.  And, yes, when someone
 suggests that those who don't agree with him remove themselves from the
 decision-making process, I would call that consensus by attrition.

Why didn't you list the meanings given by your link;
quote
1. A rubbing away or wearing down by friction.
 
2. A gradual diminution in number or strength because of constant stress.
 
3. A gradual, natural reduction in membership or personnel, as through 
retirement, resignation, or death.
 
4. Repentance for sin motivated by fear of punishment rather than by love of 
God.
/quote

Assuming that 4. is not what people are talking about;
3. indicates that any reduction of numbers can be called by attrition 
irregardless of method for that to occur, which I would see no harm in per 
se.
1. and 2. is probably what people are referring to, which are essentially the 
same.
Avalon has apparently been full of stress for a very long time, way before 
Merlin was in Steve's head. Heaps of people left due to it, a long, long time 
ago. I find it awkward that the most stress-tolerant people are accused of 
doing something bad. Are they responsible for adding to the stress? Yes. But 
so are many of the people who left.

And regarding the developer/committer base in Merlin;
Some highly successful projects in ASF, has started with just a few people, 
and not exceeding 5 in its first year. Merlin's first *beta* release was in 
Sep 2003, then effectively 1 committer. The first official release, endorsed 
by the PMC, was in late May this year, and effectively two core committers 
and 3-4 working on auxillary stuff.
Now, there are 4 developers in Metro who hack around in the core, and ~3-4 
working on aux stuff. I would call this natural progression, even within ASF.


Attrition happens in all projects, no matter if they are successful or not. It 
is only how you play the word game, the FUD and the general politics whether 
it is perceived as 'believable' or not.

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Serge Knystautas
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
You really think that we consider that fair judgement?
I do not blame you or Stephen or anyone individually for James's 
dependencies.  Stephen asked the question of whether these dependencies 
could, or rather shouldn't it, lead me to direct blame at the ASF 
establishment, and so I laid out the order in which I would assign 
blame.  Regardless of organizational structure (which I gave), it is 
certainly the group of coders fault before someone who has never checked 
out the code, and certainly the loud coders before the others.  That 
doesn't mean it's fair, or even matters that much.

I think Aaron should be sainted because a) it was volunteer and b) it 
was a poisoned situation that needed to end.  Nobody new should consider 
linking to that codebase.  Just let it die and the phoenix will be 
reborn from its ashes (pun intended).

There certainly seems a lot of illwill between you+Stephen and the ASF 
establishment.  I can somewhat understand though not empathize with 
wanting to have history reflect what you see as having happened.  To 
play devil's advocate, everything new I use is built outside of the ASF, 
so what's the big deal about having to take your code elsewhere?

--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech  software . strategy . design  http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Monday 20 December 2004 10:01, Serge Knystautas wrote:

 That doesn't mean it's fair, or even matters that much.

Passing judgement on someone often doesn't matter much, except to the 
'convicted'. Not guilty vs 4 weeks in jail with parole can change 
someone's life dramatically.
Never-the-less.

 To
 play devil's advocate, everything new I use is built outside of the ASF,
 so what's the big deal about having to take your code elsewhere?

Besides some few weeks of code transmorphing, license-based impossibilities of 
remaining totally backward compatible and the hassles coming from our choice 
of hosting ourselves (cost of dedicated hosting is dropping rapidly), I now 
agree that being outside ASF has many advantages, and far fewer disadvantages 
than I expected.

Are you hinting that ASF's significance will diminish over time, as it is 
unable to cope with its own growth in light of the legacy?
Is there a scalability issue with OSS in general? In ASF?
Are there long-term problems of keeping smaller projects healthy? How about 
the larger ones? Do they need the benevolent dictator with his lieutenants?

Just some thoughts...

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 I can somewhat understand though not empathize with
 wanting to have history reflect what you see as having happened.

Maybe this about making Apache a better place by identifying hypocrisy
here out in the open instead of behind the protection of private lists.
Maybe it's about dealing with the breach of procedure by the Chair of a
PMC and ensuring that this does not get rewarded nor repeated.  Maybe
this is about sending a message to some of the members of the board that
coercion has consequence.

Stephen.

 --
 Serge Knystautas
 Lokitech  software . strategy . design  http://www.lokitech.com p.

 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Tim O'Brien
If the ASF doesn't work for you then get busy at dpml.  Really, go and
innovate.  But, please don't stick around and try to prove a point by
continuously trolling the community@ list.


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Serge Knystautas
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
That doesn't mean it's fair, or even matters that much.
Passing judgement on someone often doesn't matter much, except to the 
'convicted'. Not guilty vs 4 weeks in jail with parole can change 
someone's life dramatically.
Never-the-less.
Someone could write a novel on all the ways I've failed with respect to 
the James project.  Did you see that huge list of terrible dependencies? 
 I was the original code donator that got convinced to adopt to this 
Avalon product (...that was only a few months away from releasing this 
great server platform.)  Hell, we're still losing to sendmail!

I just don't know what the big deal is about failing an open source 
project.  I certainly would never compare it to a conviction, guilt, or 
jail.

Are you hinting that ASF's significance will diminish over time, as it is 
unable to cope with its own growth in light of the legacy?
Is there a scalability issue with OSS in general? In ASF?
Are there long-term problems of keeping smaller projects healthy? How about 
the larger ones? Do they need the benevolent dictator with his lieutenants?
In a word, dunno.
--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech  software . strategy . design  http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 09:21 PM 12/19/2004, Stephen McConnell wrote:

Maybe this about making Apache a better place by identifying hypocrisy
here out in the open instead of behind the protection of private lists.
Maybe it's about dealing with the breach of procedure by the Chair of a
PMC and ensuring that this does not get rewarded nor repeated.

The phrase can't we all get along comes to mind.

Clearly that wasn't the case here, which is why, clearly, this
code had moved on to other venues.

Apache is about community (hence, the title of this mailing list)
and to my understanding, such didn't exist, or was so fractured
as to imply there was no salvaging it.

Thanks to those who helped lay the issues to rest, happy ranting
to those who wish to beat the dead horse, and long live good code
in whatever forum is appropriate to it.

Bill




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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Scott Sanders
Thanks to those who helped lay the issues to rest, happy ranting
to those who wish to beat the dead horse, and long live good code
in whatever forum is appropriate to it.
Amen, +1
Scott
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 
 Who wants to commit any code or do anything in an environment as 
 poisonous as Avalon was at the time? 
 
 4. So you don't want to spend any time in Avalon, but you really do want to 
 make it hard for everyone else? There has to be more than one to have a 
 disagreement.

Regardless of whether there was any 'right' or 'wrong' position, it
appears that there were irreducible differences.  I only recall one
side expressing a willingness to compromise.  My memory may be imperfect,
though.

 The only ones willing to keep committing were
 those who were determined to bulldoze there agenda into the repository.
 
 5. In a positive atmosphere, it would be called; Prepared to take action, 
 when paralysis had set into the community.

ISTR some issues about ignored vetos and vetos without sufficient
justification.

 The agenda was to promote Merlin 
 into a platform for component oriented architecture. When that was considered 
 being against approx half the PMC and some additional developers, we started 
 the process of taking Merlin to TLP, but the Excalibur group just needed to 
 be better, and by throwing in a second proposal, at least one member of the 
 Board intervened privately, and asked us to drop the Merlin TLP and forge 
 ahead with the new vision. Now, I call that a mandate.

Please clarify what you mean by 'mandate' here.  That the board was mandating
that you drop the Merlin TLP idea?

 Yet, Excalibur TLP
 without me and Steve was manna from heaven for this group, but it was 
 definately a matter of balkanization along people and not technology. 
 Something Mr Coar would never agree to.

One thing I don't agree to is people putting words in my mouth.  Please
cease doing so.

 Then why in the world are you bringing your grief back here?
 
 8. grief. My dear little boy, if you call this grief you don't know much 
 about life. Call me when someone really near to you pass away, and then we 
 can talk about grief.

I believe this is a cultural miscommunication.  I think Aaron meant grief
as in 'giving grief':

 In retrospect, do I regret that we now are active outside ASF? No, not at
 all.
 
 Then why in the world are you bringing your grief back here?

'If you have no regrets about having moved outside the ASF, why do you
care what happens there and why are you contributing to this thread?'

Aaron can correct me if I'm wrong.

In any event, on the face of it I consider your 'my dear little boy' remark
to be condescending, offensive, and uncalled-for.  But that too might be
a lingual/cultural misunderstanding.

 Maybe I am just satanistic sadist who like to kick a dead horse. Maybe I 
 happen to think that a great injustice has been made, and don't like when 
 people make statements portrayed as facts, when they at the most can be 
 called perceptions.

Heh.  Sounds like the pot and kettle calling each other black.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcc+mZrNPMCpn3XdAQHjEgQAlXpZfmfBipX7UI3UAW4vvJSx0VG1GYNJ
hEtT+l+veoLumaPOJWuLBEfNUp5VoF/q/l8gOYPieXuz4q54G8M4CTw4WelP/fxv
ljSQZOFgHz1Jg2+5/PMaJVMMHR0NIM6Pni4bLgU1Ta2IRyR6t9De4d4YZHm3zxT/
5ludNB0pn5M=
=oxoX
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 Maybe it's about dealing with the breach of procedure by the Chair of a
 PMC and ensuring that this does not get rewarded nor repeated.

Once again, there was no technical breach of procedure.  Of custom,
perhaps, but not of procedure.  This is another dead horse that
should stop getting beaten.  Complain about the violation of custom,
if you like, but stop stating/insinuating that ASF policies/procedures
were violated.  It didn't happen, at least not in the situation under
discussion.

 Maybe
 this is about sending a message to some of the members of the board that
 coercion has consequence.

Actually, I'm seeing quite a number of attempts here to 'send messages' to
several different destinations.  So far most of them seem to be getting
marked 'return to sender.'  Or perhaps they aren't really there, and I need
to have my prescription changed so I don't see 'em any more.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcdBKprNPMCpn3XdAQG8WwP9FQ47BhsQpvn4AMKXAgcHgEDEGVoCtZ/X
RmH6AnupOB1Y96uFgzIqlWoSP+MzkuXvuSD8BtB+HFvDfV4BGovpAAwtUE8SGEsp
XNZdYakAFnTg/wWx85Yr5dXZKBLV1XKEtK5DEAmueV8JuHL729RzB6xbVVpsRJtr
RELBBzoewgw=
=tSDL
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 Irrespective
 of the validity of this opinion - members of the board actively
 encouraged Aaron to ignore any PMC opinion and take an executive
 decision.

Provide citations supporting this, please.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcc++5rNPMCpn3XdAQHV4AP+JmzuBCMztjvIGTex5CURBINxAQbJPWXg
JuCiEYMyzYXVgdwxFQN9Hw3Nn7pK4B/M2060sPNYQEF3nz3actxH3NsLZ7Yth2Xw
4NVQAz5cPDJ/PvtFlnE7h5ossgu6HJE82J27BLOKiMSWMNe7597QqTJkeqARxSDB
HLG6ztoDiMw=
=a1vc
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 05:05, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
  Who wants to commit any code or do anything in an environment as
  poisonous as Avalon was at the time?
 
  4. So you don't want to spend any time in Avalon, but you really do want
  to make it hard for everyone else? There has to be more than one to have
  a disagreement.

 Regardless of whether there was any 'right' or 'wrong' position, it
 appears that there were irreducible differences.  I only recall one
 side expressing a willingness to compromise.  My memory may be imperfect,
 though.

I am sure that you have some very specific episode in mind, and by leaving 
that out, it is hard to respond to it. I give you an example of what I call 
'compromise' and 'collaboration' ;
*  The Merlin camp was accused of bulldozing the people who supported the 
Excalibur/Fortress platforms.
*  The Excalibur codebase was in a terrible shape and didn't build.
*  Fortress was in slightly better shape, but couldn't build in a single 
invocation, due to internal cyclic dependencies.
*  Fortress and Excalibur has cyclic dependencies between them.
*  There was a cyclic dependency that went via a project in the Incubator 
(AltRMI).
*  I spent several weeks (actual man-weeks) unnesting all of that, and making 
it ready for a final release.
*  I then spend additional unknown amount of time, to get the same codebases 
(+Phoenix) to build in Gump.

(note, Steve helped out a lot in the above excersize, but was primarily 
focusing on getting Merlin ready for a release.)

Now, if I have no sense of collaboration, taking care of the Legacy and 
compromise (in this case balancing my time between Excalibur vs Merlin), 
then I have no clue what you guys expect from people.

If inability of compromise is the same as refusing to implement what others 
think should be done, then just about every single project in ASF is guilty 
as charged. Each individual works on what he/she finds interesting, relevant 
and important. Opinions are appreciated, but by no means right, just because 
a group within the community say so.


  The only ones willing to keep committing were
  those who were determined to bulldoze there agenda into the repository.
 
  5. In a positive atmosphere, it would be called; Prepared to take
  action, when paralysis had set into the community.

 ISTR some issues about ignored vetos and vetos without sufficient
 justification.

(Don't know what ISTR stands for)

Ok, I would like to know of these vetoes. Not more FUD.
The only veto I know of that has been in dispute, is Leo Simons veto against 
the new site, which in defense I say;
1. It came in late, long after the change was executed.
2. His issue was regarding the change of wording in the specification of the 
AF4.2, which he claimed was an incompatible change for component authors.
3. In the midst of that clarification, heaps of people stepped in with other 
issues, murking what is on the table of a veto and what is not;
  -  Berin Loritsch had a list of issues, IIRC, mostly concerning missing 
redirect links, and I recall the final conversation with him that his 
concerns were all addressable.
  -  Stefano Mazzocchi jump in, making a big thing about the Avalon Legacy and 
the people who was before (without noticing that he himself, together with a 
few others had been properly ADDED to the list of developers, which 
previously was missing before I dug into it.), which led to a Ford 
Thunderbird analogy (which *I* found amuzing).
4. Most people having negative reaction, fuelling the flames were not part of 
the daily Avalon community. Steve made the mistake of trying to defend our 
choices, which got out of hand and he resigned in response to make sure 
everything cool down.

But that was all about Leo Simons veto... I am sure you must be talking about 
something else...

  The agenda was to promote Merlin
  into a platform for component oriented architecture. When that was
  considered being against approx half the PMC and some additional
  developers, we started the process of taking Merlin to TLP, but the
  Excalibur group just needed to be better, and by throwing in a second
  proposal, at least one member of the Board intervened privately, and
  asked us to drop the Merlin TLP and forge ahead with the new vision. Now,
  I call that a mandate.

 Please clarify what you mean by 'mandate' here.  That the board was
 mandating that you drop the Merlin TLP idea?

Mandate that the Board, or parts thereof, thought it was better to spin the 
Legacy into a new project and let Avalon grow into a Merlin-based community 
and the visions we had.

  Yet, Excalibur TLP
  without me and Steve was manna from heaven for this group, but it was
  definately a matter of balkanization along people and not technology.
  Something Mr Coar would never agree to.

 One thing I don't agree to is people putting words in my mouth.  Please
 cease doing so.

So you want the quote? You have been hammering me 

RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Noel J. Bergman
 The active committer community objected to the transfer of
 dead code from cvs to svn, arguing that the Avalon svn
 should contain the active alive code.

And that would have been wrong.  SVN is our successor to CVS, and we are to
PRESERVE *ALL* history of our code, which is an asset.

 In my mind (and I'm not alone) this was the start of a fallout
 between the chair, certain members of the board, and members of
 the Avalon development community.

I'm not on the Board, and I am one of the most vocal at insisting on
absolute preservation of development history.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Niclas Hedhman wrote:

 Noel J. Bergman wrote:
  http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=attrition.

 Why didn't you list the meanings given by your link

Because people can read.

 1. and 2. is probably what people are referring to

Yes.

 Some highly successful projects in ASF, has started with just a
 few people, and not exceeding 5 in its first year.

 Now, there are 4 developers in Metro who hack around in the core,
 and ~3-4 working on aux stuff.

Point?  You seem to keep forgetting that I supported Merlin havine a home at
the ASF.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Niclas Hedhman wrote:

 I give you an example of what I call 'compromise' and 'collaboration' ;

Those events as you describe them did happen.  If they were the only ones,
we'd have a happy healthy community.

 Each individual works on what he/she finds interesting, relevant
 and important. Opinions are appreciated, but by no means right,
 just because a group within the community say so.

Actually, all it takes to veto a change is one PMC member to cast a -1 with
a technical justification.  The issue is how a community deals with those
vetos, and how progress can be made by resolving them.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-20 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

 Maybe this about making Apache a better place by identifying hypocrisy
 here out in the open instead of behind the protection of private lists.

yawn  The facts don't bear witness to the claim.

 Maybe it's about dealing with the breach of procedure by the Chair of a
 PMC and ensuring that this does not get rewarded nor repeated.  Maybe
 this is about sending a message to some of the members of the board that
 coercion has consequence.

None of which happened.

--- Noel

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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-19 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 15 December 2004 21:01
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
  Smoke and Mirrors  -  isn't there a passage in the New Testament 
  with something about sin and stones ? And it's amazing how high the 
  political  can stack without smell. But, anyway, that is history

  so let's move on with our lives - after all, the only ones who 
  really got hurt were the Avalon users, and the ASF establishment 
  have already declared that they are not important.
  
 
 I've tried to stay out of this thread(s), but I just have to say, 
 give me a break.  James was one of Avalon's most visible users, and 
 I simply cannot stand to hear someone from Avalon criticize the ASF 
 establishment about the treatment of Avalon users.

Serge:

Perhaps it could be argued that the following list positions James as a
visible user of dead, never released, unreproducible, redundant and
unsupported technology?  I couldn't say.  But I would like to know if
this is what you meant by the ASF establishment taking care of the James
community?

Dependency  ASF Management Strategy

avalon-framework-4.1.3.jar  EXCALIBUR
excalibur-pool-1.0.jar  EXCALIBUR
excalibur-logger-1.0.jarEXCALIBUR
logkit-1.2.jar  EXCALIBUR
excalibur-thread-1.0.jarEXCALIBUR
excalibur-datasource-1.0.jarEXCALIBUR

excalibur-baxter-1.0a.jar   DEAD
excalibur-containerkit-1.0.jar  DEAD
excalibur-configuration-1.0.jar DEPRICATED
excalibur-instrument-0.1.jarNEVER RELEASED
excalibur-cli-1.0.jar   REPLACE BY COMMONS CLI
excalibur-io-1.1.jarREPLACE BY COMMONS IO
cornerstone.jar UNRELEASED  UNREPODUCABLE
excalibur-concurrent-1.0.jarDEAD
excalibur-i18n-1.0.jar  DEAD
phoenix-client.jar  DEAD
excalibur-threadcontext-1.0.jar DEAD
excalibur-collections-1.0.jar   DEAD
excalibur-extension-1.0a.jarDEAD
excalibur-util-1.0.jar  DEAD
phoenix-bsh-commands.jarDEAD

The above list is actually really interesting because it was a subject
at the center of the first critical drama between the Chair, members
of the board, and activate Avalon committers.  The active committer
community objected to the transfer of dead code from cvs to svn, arguing
that the Avalon svn should contain the active alive code.  Irrespective
of the validity of this opinion - members of the board actively
encouraged Aaron to ignore any PMC opinion and take an executive
decision.  In my mind (and I'm not alone) this was the start of a
fallout between the chair, certain members of the board, and members of
the Avalon development community.

Stephen.



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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Stephen McConnell

 -Original Message-
 From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 15 December 2004 23:11
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
  the only ones who really got hurt were the Avalon users, and the ASF

  establishment have already declared that they are not important.
 
 With the exception of Phoenix, which evolved externally as Loom, and 
 Merlin, which decided to move away from the ASF, all of the Avalon 
 code is still under ASF management in the Excalibur project.  In 
 effect, Avalon was renamed Excalibur, and the two container factions 
 that chose not to participate with everyone else have left for 
 pastures that permit such behavior.

Noel:

When you say and the two container factions that chose not to
participate with everyone else you are implying and active choice?  Do
you believe that the Avalon community was presented with a choice?

Secondly, do you believe that the Metro project was established on the
premise of non-participation or was pastures that permit such
behavior just an unfortunate turn of phrase?

Stephen.



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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

 When you say and the two container factions that chose not to
 participate with everyone else you are implying and active
 choice?  Do you believe that the Avalon community was
 presented with a choice?

Yes to both.  And multiple of each over extended periods of time.

 Secondly, do you believe that the Metro project was established
 on the premise of non-participation or was pastures that
 permit such behavior just an unfortunate turn of phrase?

My reference was to the choice by the Metro project to go elsewhere, where
the leaders can make decisions without needing to cater to competing or
conflicting voices from an established community, rather than to keep Metro
within the ASF, and within the bounds of our decision making processes.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: 17 December 2004 03:09
 To: community@apache.org
 Subject: RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed
 
 Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
  When you say and the two container factions that chose not to 
  participate with everyone else you are implying and active choice?

  Do you believe that the Avalon community was presented with a 
  choice?
 
 Yes to both.  And multiple of each over extended periods of time.
 
  Secondly, do you believe that the Metro project was established on 
  the premise of non-participation or was pastures that permit such

  behavior just an unfortunate turn of phrase?
 
 My reference was to the choice by the Metro project to go elsewhere, 
 where the leaders can make decisions without needing to cater to 
 competing or conflicting voices from an established community, rather 
 than to keep Metro within the ASF, and within the bounds of our 
 decision making processes.

Thank you for that clarification.

Concerning our decision making processes, I have a couple of
questions...

  * What do you think is the role of a PMC in our decision 
making process?

  * Within our decision processes, what do you think is more 
important - the community or the individual?

Stephen.



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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

   * What do you think is the role of a PMC in our decision
 making process?

The PMC makes all binding decisions regarding a project.  If the PMC fails
in that regard to the satisfaction of the Foundation's stakeholders, the
Board can, and will be expected to, take action.

   * Within our decision processes, what do you think is more
 important - the community or the individual?

Short answer: the community.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread William A. Rowe, Jr.
At 08:30 PM 12/16/2004, Stephen McConnell wrote:

Concerning our decision making processes, I have a couple of
questions...

  * What do you think is the role of a PMC in our decision 
making process?

They have absolute decision making process within the board's
mandate for their project.

  * Within our decision processes, what do you think is more 
important - the community or the individual?

The community.  Individuals participate, but the distinction
between an ASF project and a, say, sourceforge project, is that
the ASF project is more than one individual.  One hopes they
survive the departure of any given individual, or the influnces
of one specific individual

Sadly, that doesn't always happen.

Bill



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread J Aaron Farr
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
* Within our decision processes, what do you think is more 
  important - the community or the individual?

The community.  Individuals participate, but the distinction
between an ASF project and a, say, sourceforge project, is that
the ASF project is more than one individual.  One hopes they
survive the departure of any given individual, or the influnces
of one specific individual
Sadly, that doesn't always happen.
Also, the ASF has established PMCs and PMC Chairs so that when a 
community breaks down, there is someone to step in and take 
responsibility.  This can happen because a community does not properly 
handle legal issues or because of severe disharmony which distrupts the 
community.

What Stephen is trying to get at is that he believes that the community 
was completely behind the Single Avalon Platform initiative and that I 
disagreed and as PMC Chair recommended the shutdown of Avalon, thus 
allowing one individual to trump the will of the community.

However, this isn't a very accurate view of what happened.
The community was not 100% behind the Single Avalon Platform, more 
specifically, we weren't behind the manner in which the Merlin 
programmers wished to implement this initiative.  Stephen didn't really 
care that others didn't agree and moved ahead anyway.  Eventually, 
enough people got sick and tired of this behavior that rather than 
fight, they left, i.e.- consensus by attrition.  What this means is that 
a few months after the initial vote, there were really only one or two 
of us left who didn't agree with Stephen's vision.  So now Stephen can 
say, well, hey, the whole community agrees with me, what's your 
problem?  Of course, all that really happened was that the Merlin team 
highjacked Avalon.

In their defense, all the Merlin developers ever wanted was a place to 
call home.  They wanted their own project space to develop in peace.  I 
don't think anyone, intially, had nefarious plans.  But the project 
started in Avalon and that's where it grew until it got so big it 
started to eclipse the original Avalon project.

What should have happened was to allow the Merlin project to grow 
somewhere outside of Avalon.  But breaking up is hard to do, so no one 
really wanted to kick Merlin out and we all thought we could work things 
out within Avalon.  However, we should have moved it to the Incubator 
instead of incubating it within Avalon.  By the time we realized Merlin 
should be separated from Avalon, the Merlin developers wanted their own 
TLP and felt incubation would be some sort of punishment or demotion.

Merlin never became a TLP for a couple of reasons.  One, not everyone 
understood the need and the technical differences between Merlin and 
Avalon/Excalibur.  Particularly, not everyone was convinced we needed 
both Merlin _and_ Avalon or Merlin _and_ Excalibur.

Additionally we have the fact that even at this point, Merlin was mostly 
a one or two man show.  And one of those developers, Stephen, had a 
history (right or wrong) of causing contention.  The Merlin team had 
shown they could develop great software, but not that they could develop 
a community which espoused the principles of the ASF.  Moreover, they 
weren't really interested in compromising.  It was a TLP or nothing at 
all.  Add these all up and we can see why the Board was leary of a 
Merlin TLP.

Eventually, everyone lost patience and the situation broke down.  Merlin 
forked to become Metro outside of the ASF and I recommended the shutdown 
of Avalon.  Stephen feels I didn't follow proper procedures and tries to 
paint me as disloyal to the Avalon community and a puppet of Board 
members bent on destroying him.  That' fine.  I can understand that 
Stephen doesn't love me right now.  I'm not losing sleep over it.

The thing is, and the reason for sharing this with the community, is 
that PMC's and communities need to watch out for this sort of thing in 
your own community.  Don't wait for the situation to get critical.  PMCs 
and PMC Chairs can intervene and should rather than watch a community 
tear itself apart.

So, to answer Stephen's question, communities are most important in the 
decision process, but individuals need to step up and step in when a 
community breaks down.

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


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Nicola Ken Barozzi
J Aaron Farr wrote:
...
The thing is, and the reason for sharing this with the community, is 
that PMC's and communities need to watch out for this sort of thing in 
your own community.  Don't wait for the situation to get critical.  PMCs 
and PMC Chairs can intervene and should rather than watch a community 
tear itself apart.
I was an Avalon PMC Chair that had to deal with these issues, and what 
happened back then - that is two years ago - is remarkably similar to 
what has happened till Avalon's closure.

If I were in the same position now, I would have been more resolute in 
pushing the community split. Time and non-intervention have only 
perpetuated problems, if not made them worse. As the saying goes, You 
can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

So, to answer Stephen's question, communities are most important in the 
decision process, but individuals need to step up and step in when a 
community breaks down.
+1
I can't agree more.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
-
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Henning Schmiedehausen
Now the partys over
Im so tired

[ ... as probably everyone else here ...]

Then I see you coming
Out of nowhere

[ ... Is this you, Stephen? ... ]

Much communication in a motion
Without conversation or a notion

[... Yep ...]

Avalon
When the samba takes you
Out of nowhere
And the backgrounds fading
Out of focus
Yes the picture changing
Every moment

[... Yep ...]

And your destination
You dont know it

[... That guy must be a clairvoyant...]

Avalon
When you bossa nova
Theres no holding
Would you have me dancing
Out of nowhere
Avalon


Comments in [] by me, with apologies to Bryan Ferry and Roxy Music.

Now, can we please lay this thread to rest? What good is it for? Just to
prove I was right?

Regards
Henning

(This was meant to be a funny/ironic comment. Come on, these lyrics are
more than twenty years old... )

-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen  INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]+49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/
 
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for hire
   Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development

Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
 fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
 position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
 is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
 deserves to be on this list of the top five problems.
   --Michelle Levesque, Fundamental Issues with
Open Source Software Development


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread Geir Magnusson Jr
On Dec 17, 2004, at 10:35 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:

Comments in [] by me, with apologies to Bryan Ferry and Roxy Music.
You just ruined this for me - I really liked that song, and I really 
hate this whole Avalon thing.

Now, can we please lay this thread to rest? What good is it for? Just 
to
prove I was right?
+1
Regards
Henning
(This was meant to be a funny/ironic comment. Come on, these lyrics are
more than twenty years old... )
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen  INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]+49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for 
hire
   Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development

Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
 fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
 position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
 is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
 deserves to be on this list of the top five problems.
   --Michelle Levesque, Fundamental Issues with
Open Source Software Development
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
Geir Magnusson Jr  +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-17 Thread J Aaron Farr
 -Original Message-
 From: Henning Schmiedehausen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
 Now, can we please lay this thread to rest? What good is it for? Just to
 prove I was right?

+1

Sorry for the noise.

I do hope, though, that the larger ASF community does learn some lessons
from what happened in Avalon and that we can avoid such unfortunate
circumstances in the future.

jaaron

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-16 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 
 Smoke and Mirrors

Not at all.  Stephen was incorrect, and I was providing the
correction.  I passed no judgement about whether any of the
decisions were the right ones, only stated that they were valid.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcCrJ5rNPMCpn3XdAQHnqAP8CXAlBBAXE32zN6lPGzyPwEUYGTEoAG4z
3x/tpGT61yuW0KWJAHB6Z6b1M7imAs+NuQlqvGJN7ersWGC9KeZQIKH7KQbPLDy4
VqfDkjaEO5qiT4x6quTGbonu5BavAAcVZ8ybVDa2D7jWI25eMhQT+Ov8LGhO3CVR
6CKvFNb2qOo=
=F0oA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-16 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Thursday 16 December 2004 04:00, Serge Knystautas wrote:
 James was one of Avalon's most visible users, and I simply
 cannot stand to hear someone from Avalon criticize the ASF establishment
 about the treatment of Avalon users.

That does not make James/Cocoon and the other ASF projects the *only* users.

Now, thanks to the private mails issue that I have been hammered for in the 
past, I can't quote the ASF Director on public lists, but when I previously 
pointed out what level of support the Merlin route had among the users, I was 
bluntly told; that doesn't matter, and given BCEL as an example of plenty 
of users but failure as a project.

Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-16 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Wednesday 01 December 2004 11:26, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
 more important than the community's vision

The [VOTE] Single Avalon Platform[1] was started by Aaron. The vote passed, 
although you decided not to participate.
True, the vote is not about Merlin==Avalon, but about a to-be-defined 
specification, although it is hinted both in the [VOTE] as well as in the 
Vote results[2], that Merlin is the only platform that had enough momentum to 
fulfill such specification.

 proceeded to engineer consensus by attrition,

I am sick and tired of hearing this about Steve (just because something is 
said enough many times, doesn't make it true), so let's bring out some 
attrition...

* Leo Sutic called the Merlin camp quoteSteve and his Nazi hordes/quote.
* I pointed out that was inappropriate language in a very formal tone, but not 
really offended.
* Greg Stein[3] steps into the discussion and goes;  What's your problem?

So, my conclusion was; to Greg it is fine to call someone a Nazist, but it is 
not fine to object to it. I found that disgusting and left the Avalon PMC in 
protest.

In the end, there was a lot of mouth and very little action from one camp, 
and very much backing your mouth with action in the other. Many people lay 
their argument to rest and steps aside to let those who are able to complete 
their vision. Steve proposes/suggest to the remaining individuals to do the 
same, THAT is what you now call attrition.

The proposal of splitting into both Excalibur and Merlin TLPs are a result of 
all these flamewars. To be frank, at that time, Merlin was the technically 
different project. It had expanded the scope of Avalon by a magnitude, yet 
members of the Board encourages us to withdraw the proposal and forge ahead 
within Avalon. The people who didn't like Merlin, started Excalibur, i.e. 
'old Avalon without Framework'.

Furthermore, during the Merlin TLP proposal, Mr Coar tells me that he will not 
support the formation of a project based on balkanization of people and only 
for differentiation on technology. YET, he did exactly that with the 
Excalibur TLP, AND not along technical differences that Merlin in effect was 
all about. When pressed, Mr Coar admits that he didn't know any of the 
technology within Avalon, and trusts other members of the Board to provide 
the judgment.


Noel, you know all of this, yet you decide to ignore facts and only re-inforce 
the myth of consensus by attrition of Stephen McConnell. Your motives for 
that is unknown, and I won't speculate, but I will not let you get away with 
it that easy.

Now is now, and everyone who set out to get Steve kicked out of ASF have 
succeeded. Mission accomplished, without officially having to kick him out.

In retrospect, do I regret that we now are active outside ASF? No, not at all. 
I think it is a bigger loss to ASF than it is to us. Transitional hurdles for 
some Merlin users, yes, but we are getting over that and will forge ahead 
with a lot of action and no mouth. Since mouthing is the fashion in 
ASF, I come here to do it... :o)

Cheers
Niclas

[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-devm=107906869526922w=2

[2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-devm=107940014832041w=2

[3] Since Greg was not an Avalon user nor developer, I assumed that he 
intervened in the capacity as ASF Chairman, but he later pointed out that he 
was acting as an interested individual, my peer developer, hanging out on the 
Avalon PMC list, and not acting in any official capacity.
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-16 Thread J Aaron Farr
Hello everyone.

 -Original Message-
 From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
 The [VOTE] Single Avalon Platform[1] was started by Aaron. The vote
 passed, although you decided not to participate.

Votes are not infallible.  Communities can change directions especially
when they realize a mistake had been made.  This is an important lesson
for all ASF communities.

In the case of the Single Avalon Platform it was a goal we all shared. 
However, we disagreed on the means.  Particularly, (speaking of the ASF
not caring about Avalon users), some of us felt that we did not need to
jetison our existing code and users of ECM/Fortress and the Framework to
get there.  Others felt the only way to move forward was to bury the past
code and users.

In the end it came down to a mandate that the Avalon PMC and community had
a responsibility to support the existing Framework (4.x) and if we could
not do so, we needed to find others who would.  Despite several attempts,
it was apparent that Avalon, in its current condition, could not satisfy
that mandate, so the code was moved to a community which would.

  proceeded to engineer consensus by attrition,

 I am sick and tired of hearing this about Steve (just because something is
 said enough many times, doesn't make it true), so let's bring out some
 attrition...

The consensus by attrition charge is NOT a myth.

The example which you bring up is not the basis for my coining the phrase
Consensus by Attrition to describe Stephen's tatics.  That philosophy
was developed over years, not one incident.  It was bluntly discussed in
many emails, public and private.  In fact, Niclas, why don't you open up
all the [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives?  I seem to remember quite a few
conversations by the Metro TLP team about wanting to, what was it?, clean
up the kitchen or take out the trash in reference to cleaning up the
dead committers in Avalon.  There was an active decision by members of
the Avalon (Merlin) community to _purge_ those who disagreed with the
Single Avalon Platform, moreover, those who disagreed with a specific
implementation plan.  I can assure you that despite what has been
suggested, there was no such conspiracy by the Board, the ASF Members, or
any other group of Avalon committers to do the same.

I'm sorry you've got an ax to grind with Greg.  His comment was _not_
about defending Leo Sutic.  You took it personally when it was never
intended to be taken personal.  Everyone has apologized but you have
refused to move beyond it.

 In the end, there was a lot of mouth and very little action from one
 camp, and very much backing your mouth with action in the other.

Who wants to commit any code or do anything in an environment as poisonous
as Avalon was at the time?  The only ones willing to keep committing were
those who were determined to bulldoze there agenda into the repository.

 The proposal of splitting into both Excalibur and Merlin TLPs are a result
 of all these flamewars. To be frank, at that time, Merlin was the
 technically different project. It had expanded the scope of Avalon by a
 magnitude, yet members of the Board encourages us to withdraw the proposal
 and forge ahead within Avalon. The people who didn't like Merlin, started
 Excalibur, i.e. 'old Avalon without Framework'.

I argued for the separate TLPs for a long time.  It would have been a
great solution.  There was definitely some misunderstanding about why we
(Avalon) felt we needed the new TLPs.  Not everyone understood the
development goals of the two communities (Excalibur and Merlin) and how
they were different.  Maybe we didn't explain it well enough.  We
certainly tried.

But it wasn't lack of differentiation on technology that scuttled our
plans.  It wasn't a lack of technical maturity, it was a lack of community
maturity.  Community health is the chief concern of the Board when
approving TLPs, whereas many Merlin TLP proponents didn't even recognize
that this was a valid concern.  There wasn't a willingness to work
together.  Instead, there was an underlying assumption that Merlin
_deserved_ to be a TLP without question.  When questions arose, instead of
working together, the Merlin team went on the defensive and then the
attack.  This, above and beyond anything else, ruined Merlin's chances.

 In retrospect, do I regret that we now are active outside ASF? No, not at
 all.

Then why in the world are you bringing your grief back here?

jaaron

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-16 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Thursday 16 December 2004 22:51, J Aaron Farr wrote:
  In fact, Niclas, why don't you open up
 all the [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives?  I seem to remember quite a few
 conversations by the Metro TLP team about wanting to, what was it?, clean
 up the kitchen or take out the trash in reference to cleaning up the
 dead committers in Avalon.

1. It was not a mailing list per se. There are no archives, only what you have 
on your hard disk.

2. Isn't it great that you can quote without a source, taking things out of 
context without worrying about public scrutiny. You have really outdone 
yourself in this one, though...

 I'm sorry you've got an ax to grind with Greg.  His comment was 
 _not_ about defending Leo Sutic.

3. For the record, the incident with Greg is IMO something that happened, 
which I still think was utterly unappropriate (Why don't *you* open the mail 
archives around it?), but not to be held against him for all times.
Furthermore, I didn't took it personally. I don't know if the law has been 
changed recently in France and Germany, but it has been illegal to even 
publish the words, and definately libel. Now, please stand with a straight 
face and say that was Ok, for for instance our german middle-aged member.


 Who wants to commit any code or do anything in an environment as 
 poisonous as Avalon was at the time? 

4. So you don't want to spend any time in Avalon, but you really do want to 
make it hard for everyone else? There has to be more than one to have a 
disagreement.

 The only ones willing to keep committing were
 those who were determined to bulldoze there agenda into the repository.

5. In a positive atmosphere, it would be called; Prepared to take action, 
when paralysis had set into the community. The agenda was to promote Merlin 
into a platform for component oriented architecture. When that was considered 
being against approx half the PMC and some additional developers, we started 
the process of taking Merlin to TLP, but the Excalibur group just needed to 
be better, and by throwing in a second proposal, at least one member of the 
Board intervened privately, and asked us to drop the Merlin TLP and forge 
ahead with the new vision. Now, I call that a mandate. Yet, Excalibur TLP 
without me and Steve was manna from heaven for this group, but it was 
definately a matter of balkanization along people and not technology. 
Something Mr Coar would never agree to.

 Not everyone understood the development goals of the two 
 communities (Excalibur and Merlin) and how they were different.

6. I didn't understand it then, and I don't understand it now.

 Community health is the chief concern of the Board when
 approving TLPs, whereas many Merlin TLP proponents didn't even 
 recognize that this was a valid concern.  There wasn't a willingness to 
 work together.

7. Not willing to work together? Leo Sutic started on some very neutral aspect 
orientation stuff, which both I and Steve supported, but when the main driver 
runs out of air, what do expect? The 'accusers' of that Steve and I were 
unwilling to co-operate, only bring up that we refuse to make implementations 
to their whimps. Except for the /LS initiative, I can't recall any other, 
where we tried to stop any progress, that someone wanted to persue. Only 
recall the opposite. We do something, everyone else want to block it.
Give me some examples where we were not willing to work together. FUD is hard 
to argue against.

 Then why in the world are you bringing your grief back here?

8. grief. My dear little boy, if you call this grief you don't know much 
about life. Call me when someone really near to you pass away, and then we 
can talk about grief.
Maybe I am just satanistic sadist who like to kick a dead horse. Maybe I 
happen to think that a great injustice has been made, and don't like when 
people make statements portrayed as facts, when they at the most can be 
called perceptions.


Niclas


-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-16 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Niclas,

J Aarron said it so well, I really have little to add, but I'll respond to a
couple of your comments directed to me.

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
 Noel J. Bergman wrote:

  proceeded to engineer consensus by attrition,

 I am sick and tired of hearing this about Steve

 Many people lay their argument to rest and steps aside to
 let those who are able to complete their vision. Steve
 proposes/suggest to the remaining individuals to do the
 same, THAT is what you now call attrition.

Well, actually the dictionary does:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=attrition.  And, yes, when someone
suggests that those who don't agree with him remove themselves from the
decision-making process, I would call that consensus by attrition.

 Noel, you know all of this, yet you decide to ignore facts and only
 re-inforce the myth of consensus by attrition of Stephen McConnell.

The PMC e-mail archives support it -- including Stephen's direct requests to
several PMC members for them to resign.

 Your motives for that is unknown

Motives?  I was one of the ones willing to support Merlin at the ASF, and
I've told Stephen that we'll be willing to test JAMES on Merlin.  However, I
have also said to him that I'm not interested in forking JAMES to do so.
Merlin must maintain compatibility with existing Avalon components.  If we
are going to rewrite JAMES to deal with container issues, we'll move away
from container dependence entirely.

 Now is now, and everyone who set out to get Steve kicked out of ASF have
 succeeded.

How is Stephen kicked out?  He's welcome to participate as far as I'm
concerned.

--- Noel


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-15 Thread Rodent of Unusual Size
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-

Stephen McConnell wrote:
 
 The Board had nothing to do with these directions or choices. Our only
 (recent) involvment was that the VP in charge of Avalon asked us to
 terminate the project, so we did.
 
 A board decision taken *without* the endorsement of the Avalon PMC,
 *without* a vote of the community and clearly in contradiction with the
 expressed interests of the committers at that time.  
 
 Let's not try and rewrite history just yet.

Let's understand the factual basis of things first.  A project
chair doesn't *have* to have endorsement from anyone else.  It
is ultimately responsible for the project, and has the necessary
authority to do whatever is appropriate.  The fact that most, if
not all, projects are led by consensus of the PMC, with the chairs
functioning essentially as peers, is a tribute to both the viability
of the structure and the abilities and understanding of the chairs
themselves.

So the PMC chair was perfectly within its authority to request that
the board terminate the project.  And from what I read on the Avalon
lists, my clear impression is that the action had majority support
within the project if not a consensus.
- --
#kenP-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist  http://Apache-Server.Com/

Millennium hand and shrimp!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBQcCBt5rNPMCpn3XdAQEWNAP/aqjxTf6Ucs8Dw4JewgDLOJBYE3Ah2ZKA
BeUjMOQZw4ZQm8FBcPgy8lVh9+3HKPFPMuIffzeQYKWNGoWEC1TZTZFLQLmcUTc5
Pz4EbfMZ7fd5NiyP9Kp1zmEhHM5L0tr7ENIu5CMPiMAgja2Be46rbl9FyT8pH7DP
pyICHT/arvY=
=0TlP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-15 Thread Niclas Hedhman
On Thursday 16 December 2004 02:26, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

 So the PMC chair was perfectly within its authority to request that
 the board terminate the project.  And from what I read on the Avalon
 lists, my clear impression is that the action had majority support
 within the project if not a consensus.

Smoke and Mirrors  -  isn't there a passage in the New Testament with 
something about sin and stones ? And it's amazing how high the political  
can stack without smell. But, anyway, that is history so let's move on with 
our lives - after all, the only ones who really got hurt were the Avalon 
users, and the ASF establishment have already declared that they are not 
important.


Cheers
Niclas
-- 
   +--//---+
  / http://www.dpml.net   /
 / http://niclas.hedhman.org / 
+--//---+


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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-15 Thread Serge Knystautas
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Smoke and Mirrors  -  isn't there a passage in the New Testament with 
something about sin and stones ? And it's amazing how high the political  
can stack without smell. But, anyway, that is history so let's move on with 
our lives - after all, the only ones who really got hurt were the Avalon 
users, and the ASF establishment have already declared that they are not 
important.
I've tried to stay out of this thread(s), but I just have to say, give 
me a break.  James was one of Avalon's most visible users, and I simply 
cannot stand to hear someone from Avalon criticize the ASF establishment 
about the treatment of Avalon users.

Avalon tried to do something huge and revolutionary at the time, had 
plenty of good intentions, mix of results, mix of personalities, 
changing visions, changing goals.  It's a long, complicated story.

But nobody in this matter (inside or outside Avalon) had bad intentions, 
and don't for a minute act like you did while others didn't.  Give me a 
break.  (IMHO, Aaron did a fantastic job dealing with a challenging 
situation.)

--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech  software . strategy . design  http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-15 Thread Noel J. Bergman
 the only ones who really got hurt were the Avalon users,
 and the ASF establishment have already declared that
 they are not important.

With the exception of Phoenix, which evolved externally as Loom, and Merlin,
which decided to move away from the ASF, all of the Avalon code is still
under ASF management in the Excalibur project.  In effect, Avalon was
renamed Excalibur, and the two container factions that chose not to
participate with everyone else have left for pastures that permit such
behavior.

Coincidentally, I came across yet another embedded use of Avalon this week.
Avalon is embedded in one of the third party portlets included with the IBM
WebSphere Portal Server.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-01 Thread Stephen McConnell


 -Original Message-
 From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 And on behalf of the developers at Avalon, I would like to Thank ALL
the
 past Chairs and members of the Avalon PMC, for a all-in-all a job well

 done.

I'm sorry - but you will have to exclude myself from the above
endorsement.  

The Avalon community established a PMC to represent the community
interests concerning the direction and administration of the Avalon
project.  The community interests were clear - a single platform, one
specification, a cohesive solution.  That decision was not respected by
the outgoing chair nor the board of directors of the ASF.  

That is not the definition of a job-well-done.  Instead this is much
more about the weakness of individuals - in particular the members of
the board of directors of the ASF and not least of all our outgoing
chain.  However - there is much that can be learnt from this.  The
weaknesses of the BOD can be attributed to their collective
unwillingness to confront members of their own board. The weakness of
our Chair was more a question of his personal loyalty to the community.

Irrespective of the above obstacles a real and tangible alternative to
ASF continues under http://www.dpml.net.  The fundamental difference -
no distinction between the people who contribute and the people who run
the process.  

Stephen.



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



Re: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-01 Thread Greg Stein
On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 02:26:43AM +0100, Stephen McConnell wrote:
...
 The Avalon community established a PMC to represent the community
 interests concerning the direction and administration of the Avalon
 project.

Um. No. The Apache Software Foundation established the PMC. Its
purpose was to provide the necessary (legal) oversight of the
development of the Avalon project. That oversight is/was necessary to
establish the appropriate legal protection for the committers on the
project and the ASF itself.

It is the ASF that releases the Avalon code, not the committers. To do
that properly, certain things need to be done for the benefit of all
involved. You may disagree with some of those processes, their
purpose, and how it was done, but that is simply too bad. They need to
exist so that our users can properly trust the code we provide.

 The community interests were clear - a single platform, one
 specification, a cohesive solution.

No, that was never clear. That was *your* desire, Stephen, and you did
everything you could to steer things in that direction. You alienated
people, you berated people, and you generally made things unpleasant
for anybody that did not have your same vision. Avalon went through
many phases, and the single platform you mention was simply the last
thing standing after your various escapades.

 That decision was not respected by
 the outgoing chair nor the board of directors of the ASF.

The Board had nothing to do with these directions or choices. Our only
(recent) involvment was that the VP in charge of Avalon asked us to
terminate the project, so we did.

Also recently, we directed the Avalon project to step up and deal with
the problems that it has had, and to take proper care of its legacy
users. But we did not specify any particular solutions. The PMC came
up with the solutions.

 That is not the definition of a job-well-done.  Instead this is much
 more about the weakness of individuals - in particular the members of
 the board of directors of the ASF and not least of all our outgoing
 chain.  However - there is much that can be learnt from this.  The
 weaknesses of the BOD can be attributed to their collective
 unwillingness to confront members of their own board.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. The Board of Directors
of the Apache Software Foundation does not have or need any
confrontation. As a group, we work together very, very well. In the
past three years or so that I've been on the Board, I can only recall
*two* votes that were not unanimous. We reach consensus very easily,
and it isn't because we beat some unnamed board member into
submission.

 The weakness of
 our Chair was more a question of his personal loyalty to the community.

I disagree. I very much respect what J Aaron Farr has done for Avalon.
You made it a rather difficult task, but he stepped up and dealt with
it. He didn't have to, but he did. And he did it because the community
needed somebody to deal with the issues.

Further, I think that he handled it very, very well. Some of the posts
that he has written shows great insight into why great communities are
needed here at Apache, and what makes a great community. He's shown
that he can also help to shape those communities, despite adversity
that was caused by certain folks. At times, he didn't take as much
action as I might have, but I fully believe that he had good reasons,
and I support the choices he made.

Aaron has my respect, and I hope he continues to be involved in other
Apache projects.

 Irrespective of the above obstacles a real and tangible alternative to
 ASF continues under http://www.dpml.net.  The fundamental difference -
 no distinction between the people who contribute and the people who run
 the process.  

You may not like the process, but the legal backing provided by the
ASF for the code that we release needs it. And in the end, our users
need that. You are certainly free to create a different model, but it
does mean the resulting code will not have the same kinds of
assurances the ASF provides, nor will you have an entity that can
assume legal liability for your results. It's your choice to make, and
for your users to decide whether that is important.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ... ASF Chairman ... http://www.apache.org/

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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-01 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Stephen McConnell wrote:

 The Avalon community established a PMC to represent the community
 interests concerning the direction and administration of the Avalon
 project.  The community interests were clear - a single platform, one
 specification, a cohesive solution.  That decision was not respected by
 the outgoing chair nor the board of directors of the ASF.

The Board had nothing to do with the closure.  The outgoing chair tried
for a long time to resolve it by other changes.  The fact is that you
decided that your vision was more important than the community's vision, and
proceeded to engineer consensus by attrition, both within the community and
within the PMC, including asking both myself and another PMC member to
resign.

Despite that, I continued to work to keep Merlin at the ASF, as did at least
one Director who had offered to personally mentor the project.  You were not
willing to accept any proposals, and prefered to remove Merlin elsewhere.

Aaron is right to thank all of those who put blood, sweat and tears into
Avalon.

 Irrespective of the above obstacles a real and tangible alternative to
 ASF continues under http://www.dpml.net.  The fundamental difference -
 no distinction between the people who contribute and the people who run
 the process.

In other words, you make the rules and run the show.

--- Noel


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



RE: [ANN] Avalon Closed

2004-12-01 Thread Henning Schmiedehausen
Messages like this are IMHO the main reason, why Avalon failed.

Stephen, you should understand, that community always means compromise.
You didn't seem to be able to accept that. In the end, these tensions
lead to the end of Avalon.

Story is over, no need to kick a dead horse. One of the good things
about ASF code _is_, that you can take it somewhere else and go on with
it. 

Good luck with Metro/Merlin. But now, please let the dead rest.

Regards
Henning

On Wed, 2004-12-01 at 02:26, Stephen McConnell wrote:
  -Original Message-
  From: Niclas Hedhman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  And on behalf of the developers at Avalon, I would like to Thank ALL
 the
  past Chairs and members of the Avalon PMC, for a all-in-all a job well
 
  done.
 
 I'm sorry - but you will have to exclude myself from the above
 endorsement.  
 
 The Avalon community established a PMC to represent the community
 interests concerning the direction and administration of the Avalon
 project.  The community interests were clear - a single platform, one
 specification, a cohesive solution.  That decision was not respected by
 the outgoing chair nor the board of directors of the ASF.  
 
 That is not the definition of a job-well-done.  Instead this is much
 more about the weakness of individuals - in particular the members of
 the board of directors of the ASF and not least of all our outgoing
 chain.  However - there is much that can be learnt from this.  The
 weaknesses of the BOD can be attributed to their collective
 unwillingness to confront members of their own board. The weakness of
 our Chair was more a question of his personal loyalty to the community.
 
 Irrespective of the above obstacles a real and tangible alternative to
 ASF continues under http://www.dpml.net.  The fundamental difference -
 no distinction between the people who contribute and the people who run
 the process.  
 
 Stephen.
 
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- 
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen  INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED]+49 9131 50 654 0   http://www.intermeta.de/
 
RedHat Certified Engineer -- Jakarta Turbine Development  -- hero for hire
   Linux, Java, perl, Solaris -- Consulting, Training, Development

Fighting for one's political stand is an honorable action, but re-
 fusing to acknowledge that there might be weaknesses in one's
 position - in order to identify them so that they can be remedied -
 is a large enough problem with the Open Source movement that it
 deserves to be on this list of the top five problems.
   --Michelle Levesque, Fundamental Issues with
Open Source Software Development


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