Robert, This is open source, debate and disagreement is part of the deal - I think you have done a ton of good things, that everything you do isn't praised and sometimes is "shot down", that is just part of the fun.
I certainly hope that you don't see one comment (that I thought was constructive) as a signal to community disagreement. just my 0.2. /je On Nov 11, 2010, at 9:20 AM, Robert Liguori wrote: > Glen, Benson, and Apache CXF team, > > Here are my responses to Glen's comments/observations related to my > contributions. > > Glen's comment: "But, also, as for the issue of time you mention, this brings > up an earlier > concern I had about the expansive "thank you" page you recently made > (http://cxf.apache.org/special-thanks.html), in which you list and explain > every Apache and other project that CXF imports, as well as (IMO) > erroneously list Apache-wide helpers like Atlassian that should be thanked > at an Apache-level and not individually within every project. " > Robert Response: I returned the "thank you" page to the version it was at > before I touched it. I also returned the "Architecture Guide" page to the > original version, as I had left it in a flux state and do not plan or have > the experience to finish it in the proper manner. > > Glen's comment: "One should also analyze the opportunity cost of making the > command line > options looking the same as the GNU conventions compared to adding > additional functionality to CXF,..." > Robert's Response: The definitions of the command line options are different > in at least three different places. Some of the inline usage definitions > don't even match what the tool actually does. For the most extreme example, > the usage for "idl2wsdl", starts out with "idltowsdl"; just do a "idl2wsdl > -help" to see for yourself. "Cleanup" was my intent of the issue raised, > meeting conventions in the process is considered a "best practice" and would > be nice to the end-user community if achieved. > > Glen's comment: "... a similar issue to your earlier desire to have the CXF > website be reformatted to look like Camel, ServiceMix, and ActiveMQ's." > Robert's Response: It was my general feeling that ASF projects should be > branded in a similar fashion. However, it's been made to clear to me by > several people at ASF that forcing branding does not work well with > open-source. > > Glen's comment: "So as you enhance the CXF documentation, please be sure > that you're not > giving CXF "puppies as presents", things that look cute but are of > relatively limited benefit and need a lot of maintenance afterwards to > remain cute. " > Robert's Response: I'm definitely not on the same page as the CXF team. It > was a nice stay. If any of my other updates seem that they do more harm than > good, please revert the web pages back to old instances. I'm not going to > fall anything else back, as I feel that has been value in my improvements to > the web-pages content. > > To wrap things up on my side, I'll look at the issues I have opened and will > try to align them with the general open-source philosophy. > > Take care, > Robert > > -----Original Message----- From: Glen Mazza > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 10:30 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Apache CXF tooling usage definitions > > > > Robert Liguori wrote: >> >> Note that I personally don't have time to contribute to this, but I do >> think >> that refined, synchronized and more accurate usage definitions would bring >> enhanced 'polished' value to the product. >> > > Several of your suggestions Robert would seem better suited for the CXF-Dev > rather than the CXF-User's list. For any project, not just CXF, many ideas > look excellent at first glance but for various reasons are known not to be > such a great idea by developers and close observers who have spent years > with the project. However unfair given all your work on the documentation, > heavy usage of CXF-Users over CXF-Dev can give the impression that you > realize that a lot of your ideas hold less and less water the more > experienced one is with the project and that you are using the User > community to unduly push sweet-looking-on-the-surface changes that perhaps > should not be made. > > One should also analyze the opportunity cost of making the command line > options looking the same as the GNU conventions compared to adding > additional functionality to CXF, a similar issue to your earlier desire to > have the CXF website be reformatted to look like Camel, ServiceMix, and > ActiveMQ's. Another factor is that volunteer developers need to work on > tasks that further themselves first and busywork (or "polishing") rarely > accomplishes that. For open source to be successful, a volunteer developer > should always be *stronger* as a result of volunteering on an open source > project, not weaker. > > But, also, as for the issue of time you mention, this brings up an earlier > concern I had about the expansive "thank you" page you recently made > (http://cxf.apache.org/special-thanks.html), in which you list and explain > every Apache and other project that CXF imports, as well as (IMO) > erroneously list Apache-wide helpers like Atlassian that should be thanked > at an Apache-level and not individually within every project. No question, > it looks very nice and professional now, but who's going to be maintaining > this? It's like you're giving us a new puppy as a present. This page is > not going to be looking very nice in several months once it falls out of > date, links get old, etc. It's not necessary for an Apache project to have > to individually thank every other Apache project it incorporates. The > source of record for determining the dependencies used by CXF is always > going to be its POM files or the lib folder of its distribution, not a > website page. > > So as you enhance the CXF documentation, please be sure that you're not > giving CXF "puppies as presents", things that look cute but are of > relatively limited benefit and need a lot of maintenance afterwards to > remain cute. > > Thanks, > Glen > > -- > View this message in context: > http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/Apache-CXF-tooling-usage-definitions-tp3253466p3260484.html > Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
