Jim Marino wrote:
<cut/>
We will only reach the right conclusion on
this important debate if we all engage constructively at a technical
level and evaluate new contributions and ideas in an open-minded way.
Your apparent characterization of Sebastien's constructive engagement
in this discussion as an attempt to "forge his own path" is unfair and
offensive, and not at all how I interpret Sebastien's recent posts.
Simon, I don't think that is fair and labeling it as offensive is
unnecessarily caustic. Perhaps Jeremy could have worded some of his
response better but I think *everyone* has been guilty of this over the
past several weeks so I'd prefer to make a general statement that we
all remain constructive since we are not doing a very good job of
community building.
I have responded to Jeremy directly (on the list) so I won't repeat
my comments here. I certainly agree that we all need to remain
constructive and I believe the best way to do this is to focus on
technical matters and give all ideas, suggestions, and proposals
a fair hearing.
My second point is that the desire for constructive discussion comes
from *all* of us, not just Sebastien. For example, Jeremy spent a
significant amount of time on the core2 architecture presentation a
month back, numerous posts to the list, proposals (e.g. constructor
injection), and scenarios, etc. - all of which were attempts to
constructively engage the community.
Yes, I agree. I was reacting to this particular post, and I was
not intending to imply that Jeremy's overall contribution to Tuscany
has been anything other than constructive. I think it is a good
principle to assume that everyone's desire is to participate
constructively and to regard all technical proposals and contributions
as attempts to be constructive.
As I mentioned in a previous post, moving the community forward starts
with positive individual acts. Perhaps you could engage by positing
scenarios to the wiki you are interested in, or respond to my response
to Sebastien asking why any of the changes he mentioned could not be
incrementally accommodated by core2? This approach sounds to me like a
nice way to accommodate the interests of many and move things forward.
I'm on vacation this week and I have very limited time available for
work-related activity. I should be able to get more involved in the
constructive ways that you suggest when I return to work next week.
Simon
--
Simon C Nash IBM Distinguished Engineer
Hursley Park, Winchester, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel. +44-1962-815156 Fax +44-1962-818999
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
