Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On 13.05.2009, at 01:23, Steve McMahon wrote: By my reading, here is the list of those willing to participate in a Plone 4 framework team: Raphael R. Ross P. Matthew W. David G. Calvin H.P. Alec M. Erik R, Laurence R. [...] If you'd like your name added, or removed, please put in a message soon. i think, i just disqualified myself by not having read the framework list for over two weeks now :( sadly, that is a pretty accurate indicator of my current resources for unpaid, non-family related commitment in general, so i'm afraid i'll have to pass. tom ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On May 13, 2009, at 1:23 AM, Steve McMahon wrote: That's eight names, and an excellent set of skills for a release that's not likely to emphasize UI work. great team — congrats! :) andi -- zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i...@zitc.de friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779 pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/ plone 3.2.2 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/ PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Ricardo Newbery a écrit : > > On May 12, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Steve McMahon wrote: > >> Ideally, a framework team should have an odd number of members in >> order to avoid tie votes. However, in watching the last couple of >> voting sessions for Plone 3, I noticed that there were not that many >> PLIPS on which every person voted. So, I think the 'odd number' rule >> of thumb isn't really that important. > > > > > Of course an 'odd number' usually only becomes important if something > contentious is on the table which can easily result in all members > casting votes. > > Since most groups define majority approval as "greater than half", a > split vote means it fails. The problem arises when a proposal can be > legitimately worded in either the affirmative or the negative. So in > the case of a split vote, the same proposed action can either pass or > fall just by stating it in a different form. > > In the case of PLIPs, there seems to be an unofficial rule that they are > always worded in the affirmative as a proposal to change the status > quo. As long as that rule is enforced and these are the only votes ever > solicited then an 'odd number' rule is probably superfluous. > > The most important in a PLIP vote is that no FTM put a veto on the proposition and later on the implementation done. If one think that the PLIP need to take in account an important usecase or that the code needs more polish or a refactoring the PLIP shoud be delayed. It was done in the past and ensure the global quality of a release. Generally when a consensus is reached the vote always have a strong majority. The FT is working to find the consensus that every Plone developer will accept not to impose by a vote of few an unwanted solution to all. Until now precedent teams succeeded in this way. Regards, -- Encolpe DEGOUTE http://encolpe.degoute.free.fr/ Logiciels libres, hockey sur glace et autres activités cérébrales ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On May 12, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Steve McMahon wrote: Ideally, a framework team should have an odd number of members in order to avoid tie votes. However, in watching the last couple of voting sessions for Plone 3, I noticed that there were not that many PLIPS on which every person voted. So, I think the 'odd number' rule of thumb isn't really that important. Of course an 'odd number' usually only becomes important if something contentious is on the table which can easily result in all members casting votes. Since most groups define majority approval as "greater than half", a split vote means it fails. The problem arises when a proposal can be legitimately worded in either the affirmative or the negative. So in the case of a split vote, the same proposed action can either pass or fall just by stating it in a different form. In the case of PLIPs, there seems to be an unofficial rule that they are always worded in the affirmative as a proposal to change the status quo. As long as that rule is enforced and these are the only votes ever solicited then an 'odd number' rule is probably superfluous. Ric Any guesses on how I wasted my college years? ;-) ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
By my reading, here is the list of those willing to participate in a Plone 4 framework team: Raphael R. Ross P. Matthew W. David G. Calvin H.P. Alec M. Erik R, Laurence R. That's eight names, and an excellent set of skills for a release that's not likely to emphasize UI work. If you'd like your name added, or removed, please put in a message soon. Ideally, a framework team should have an odd number of members in order to avoid tie votes. However, in watching the last couple of voting sessions for Plone 3, I noticed that there were not that many PLIPS on which every person voted. So, I think the 'odd number' rule of thumb isn't really that important. The first matter of business for a new Framework Team is to nominate a Release Manager to the board. My impression is that Eric Steele has been accepted by acclamation. If anyone would like to have a private framework team discussion on that, please let me know in an e-mail, and we'll get a list organized to allow non-public discussion. Thanks all! Steve On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote: > Jon Stahl wrote: >> >> Eric Steele wrote: >>> >>> Folks, >>> >>> A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by >>> Friday >>> >>> There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare >>> this down to a list of 7 people? >>> >>> We currently have responses of: >>> available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) >>> unavailable: Andi (3) >> >> I'd like to gently encourage Hanno to play a formal role on this new FWT. >> As the "Plone trunk/future" release manager and our most prolific >> contributor, I think it will be important for him to provide continuity >> between the Plone 4 release and Plone Future. >> I would also personally love to see Martin Aspeli and Laurence Rowe in the >> mix as well, since they have such deep understandings of our stack and are >> helping architect large chunks of the future. > > I'm happy to be a part of this team too, presuming that most of the work > will be later in the summer. > > Laurence > > > ___ > Framework-Team mailing list > Framework-Team@lists.plone.org > http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team > -- Steve McMahon Reid-McMahon, LLC st...@reidmcmahon.com st...@dcn.org ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Jon Stahl wrote: Eric Steele wrote: Folks, A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare this down to a list of 7 people? We currently have responses of: available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) unavailable: Andi (3) I'd like to gently encourage Hanno to play a formal role on this new FWT. As the "Plone trunk/future" release manager and our most prolific contributor, I think it will be important for him to provide continuity between the Plone 4 release and Plone Future. I would also personally love to see Martin Aspeli and Laurence Rowe in the mix as well, since they have such deep understandings of our stack and are helping architect large chunks of the future. I'm happy to be a part of this team too, presuming that most of the work will be later in the summer. Laurence ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
We currently have responses of: available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) unavailable: Andi (3) I'm available. If a million other people want to do it, I'll be equally happy to bow out and just write a bunch of PLIPs. Erik ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Jon Stahl wrote: > I'd like to gently encourage Hanno to play a formal role on this new > FWT. As the "Plone trunk/future" release manager and our most prolific > contributor, I think it will be important for him to provide continuity > between the Plone 4 release and Plone Future. I'm happy to speak up and share my opinions in all our communication channels. I don't see a reason why I should be part of the official team and get voting powers, though. I'd rather spent my time on coding and trust all the other fine folks in our community to do the right decisions. If that turns out to go into a different direction than what I'd imagined, majority wins :) And don't make me an even more potential single-point-of-failure than I'm already. Hanno ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Eric Steele wrote: > Folks, > > A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday > > There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare > this down to a list of 7 people? > > We currently have responses of: > available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) > unavailable: Andi (3) I'd be happy to be a part of this new framework team, though obviously people from the existing teams should have priority (as should any people deeply involved in Plone trunk development like Martin and Hanno). Alec ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On 8 mei 2009, at 02:10, Eric Steele wrote: Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. Eric Hi folks, Due to my current and near-future workload I am going to pass. Danny ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
You can count me in on the new team too. Cal On May 10, 2009, at 11:25 AM, Eric Steele wrote: Folks, A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare this down to a list of 7 people? We currently have responses of: available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) unavailable: Andi (3) Eric On May 8, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Andreas Zeidler wrote: On May 8, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Raphael Ritz wrote: Eric Steele wrote: Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. I'm with Eric here and offer to participate from the Plone 3 FWT side. +1 on eric's suggestion. unfortunately, i'm gonna have to pass this time, though. with our second baby due very soon now as well as blob support + unified folders on the roadmap, i think i'll be busy enough as it is... andi -- zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i...@zitc.de friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779 pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/ plone 3.2.2 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/ ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team -- S i x F e e t U p , I n c . | http://www.sixfeetup.com Phone: +1 (317) 861-5948 x602 cal...@sixfeetup.com ANNOUNCING the first Plone Immersive Training Experience | Sept. 10-11-12, 2009 http://sixfeetup.com/immerse ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Eric Steele wrote: Folks, A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare this down to a list of 7 people? We currently have responses of: available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) unavailable: Andi (3) I'd like to gently encourage Hanno to play a formal role on this new FWT. As the "Plone trunk/future" release manager and our most prolific contributor, I think it will be important for him to provide continuity between the Plone 4 release and Plone Future. I would also personally love to see Martin Aspeli and Laurence Rowe in the mix as well, since they have such deep understandings of our stack and are helping architect large chunks of the future. US$0.02, :jon ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On May 10, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Eric Steele wrote: Folks, A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare this down to a list of 7 people? We currently have responses of: available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) unavailable: Andi (3) I'm also available for the new team. peace, David Glick Web Developer ONE/Northwest New tools and strategies for engaging people in protecting the environment http://www.onenw.org davidgl...@onenw.org work: (206) 286-1235 x32 mobile: (206) 679-3833 Subscribe to ONEList, our email newsletter! Practical advice for effective online engagement http://www.onenw.org/full_signup ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 17:25, Eric Steele wrote: > A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday > > There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare > this down to a list of 7 people? > > We currently have responses of: > available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) > unavailable: Andi (3) I'll have to pass too, if only because then I'll be a member of 3 teams. I am clear out of time for the next 2 months at least. -- Martijn Pieters ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Folks, A gentle prod since Steve wants to have something to vote on by Friday There seems to be general agreement on the hybrid team idea. Can we pare this down to a list of 7 people? We currently have responses of: available: Raphael (3), Ross (4), Matt (4) unavailable: Andi (3) Eric On May 8, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Andreas Zeidler wrote: On May 8, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Raphael Ritz wrote: Eric Steele wrote: Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. I'm with Eric here and offer to participate from the Plone 3 FWT side. +1 on eric's suggestion. unfortunately, i'm gonna have to pass this time, though. with our second baby due very soon now as well as blob support + unified folders on the roadmap, i think i'll be busy enough as it is... andi -- zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i...@zitc.de friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779 pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/ plone 3.2.2 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/ ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On 8 May 2009, at 07:47, Ross Patterson wrote: Ditto from the 4 side. Ross Also happy to serve. Matt ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
On May 8, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Raphael Ritz wrote: Eric Steele wrote: Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. I'm with Eric here and offer to participate from the Plone 3 FWT side. +1 on eric's suggestion. unfortunately, i'm gonna have to pass this time, though. with our second baby due very soon now as well as blob support + unified folders on the roadmap, i think i'll be busy enough as it is... andi -- zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - i...@zitc.de friedelstraße 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779 pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/ plone 3.2.2 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone/ PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Raphael Ritz writes: > Eric Steele wrote: >> Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" >> release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team >> members from each of the currently-existing teams. >> > > I'm with Eric here and offer to participate > from the Plone 3 FWT side. Ditto from the 4 side. Ross ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Eric Steele wrote: Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. I'm with Eric here and offer to participate from the Plone 3 FWT side. Raphael Eric ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Since the new Plone 4 is looking like, essentially, a "transitional" release, another possibility would be to pull its framework team members from each of the currently-existing teams. Eric On May 7, 2009, at 7:58 PM, Steve McMahon wrote: Let me ask what the level of enthusiasm is in the current P3 framework team. If they'd shift to become the new Plone 2009 team and the existing p4 team would become the "trunk" team, that might be good. We could recruit to add to the new Plone 2009 (old P3) team if some folks are burned out. IMHO, three different framework teams is not organizationally supportable. We'd drown in confusion. On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Martin Aspeli > wrote: Rob Gietema wrote: > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) is > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed > for an in-between team. On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is warranted? It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. I agree. I really wouldn't want to disband or repurpose the "trunk" framework team or release manager. We probably want to look for a new team, maybe with a bit more overlap with the existing/trunk teams than usual. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team -- Steve McMahon Reid-McMahon, LLC st...@reidmcmahon.com st...@dcn.org ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
Re: [Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Let me ask what the level of enthusiasm is in the current P3 framework team. If they'd shift to become the new Plone 2009 team and the existing p4 team would become the "trunk" team, that might be good. We could recruit to add to the new Plone 2009 (old P3) team if some folks are burned out. IMHO, three different framework teams is not organizationally supportable. We'd drown in confusion. On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Martin Aspeli wrote: > Rob Gietema wrote: >> >> > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has >> > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) >> is >> > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed >> > for an in-between team. >> >> On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's >> own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is >> warranted? >> >> >> It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus >> from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea >> to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. > > I agree. I really wouldn't want to disband or repurpose the "trunk" > framework team or release manager. We probably want to look for a new team, > maybe with a bit more overlap with the existing/trunk teams than usual. > > Martin > > -- > Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who > want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book > > > ___ > Framework-Team mailing list > Framework-Team@lists.plone.org > http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team > -- Steve McMahon Reid-McMahon, LLC st...@reidmcmahon.com st...@dcn.org ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
[Framework-Team] Re: Plone 2009: Going from here
Rob Gietema wrote: > I'd nominate the incumbent 3.x team for this; this team already has > the mindset to get this going; the future plone team (trunk team?) is > focusing on vision right now, which I think may not be what's needed > for an in-between team. On second thought; this may be a significant enough release, with it's own 4.x release series, that perhaps a new team altogether is warranted? It would be a shame if the development of Plone trunk will get less focus from the FWT when working on Plone 4. So it might indeed not be a bad idea to have 2 teams, one team for Plone 4 and one team for Plone trunk. I agree. I really wouldn't want to disband or repurpose the "trunk" framework team or release manager. We probably want to look for a new team, maybe with a bit more overlap with the existing/trunk teams than usual. Martin -- Author of `Professional Plone Development`, a book for developers who want to work with Plone. See http://martinaspeli.net/plone-book ___ Framework-Team mailing list Framework-Team@lists.plone.org http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
