avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: [Proposal] Remove all/most one-man codebases
Date Thu, 05 Dec 2002 19:03:27 GMT
> We have codebases in Avalon that are divisve - all of them one-man
> codebases.

Start with a new avalon module.  The Community has to decide what to accept
into it.  Mantra: decide as a Community, support as a Community, fix as a

> Sure we can propose a new framework/container...
> Technically that is high risk, with a long incubation period and
> it is likely that a year from now it will still suck.

(1) Avalon 4 is good now, and will receive on-going development as-is within
its existing CVS modules.  (2) Avalon 5 may take time, but that isn't a bad
thing, given #1.  (3) I don't agree with your a priori assumption of
quality.  You've already pointed out how much has been learned, and that
there are things that you'd do differently (as well as parts you'd throw out

> Socially it is unlikely to go much better and will likely
> only cause more division/polarization.

I disagree.  One thing that will help the project socially is for everyone
to start accepting communal responsibility for the entire project, with the
possible exception of projects in avalon-sandbox.  Again, another reason for
having one avalon CVS module.

> We already have seen oodles of FUD and insults at even
> the mention of these things.

There is a lot of energy going into the status quo.

> So whatever way you cut it you are setting Avalon up for a fall
> because code means nothing without community and in this
> environment there is little chance of community.

The latter MUST change, and then the former is no longer true.

> I am still not really clear on why my cvs access was removed

Sorry to hear that.  Can't help you there.  But you know whom CAN tell you
what you don't know, and they are whom you should contact.

> It seems like Nicola has decided that I no longer have other rights
> such as voting rights.

I hadn't noticed.  In my mind, I count your vote, even when I disagree with
you.  But then again, I mentally count votes from any party with an
intelligent outlook.

> So there is little chance of influence there. All in all
> my ability to contribute has been mostly removed.

Are you joking?  Hello!  Peter, take a look at the world.  You express
yourself and people respond.  You HAVE influenced events, and will continue
to do so in-so-far as you choose to participate.

> However by far the biggest problem is that many people are
> not here purely for the benefit of Avalon as a whole.

Anyone who isn't here for the benefit of Avalon, ought to remove themselves
or change their mindset.  Mind you, those of us who are Avalon consumers
have our reasons for wanting Avalon to succeeed.

> how long have we needed to move to maven for our builds.
> I know of at least three different committers who have
> expressed a desire to move towards it but are reluctent
> to propose it because they will be jumped on by Nicola.

<<shrug>> Nicola didn't say "boo" when we talked about possibly moving to
Maven for James.  We are considering using Maven with Forrest, and have both
a Maven guy and a Forrest guy (Nicola) lined up to help.

> would be in Avalons best interests to upgrade [to maven]
> but it wouldn't be in centipedes best interest

As I said, Nicola didn't say anything on the James list, other than to take
the time and do a Forrest prototype for us after we asked.

> look to how Stefano acts like a tool everytime someone ...

Is this really necessary?  The Maven comment was at least related to Avalon.
This was gratuituous.

> look at conflict between info/meta. Info is technically a far
> better choice but there is little chance of going wit it
> without massive conflict/FUD.

Let's discuss this in the context of Avalon 5.  I'm already convinced that
Avalon 4 will stay as chaotic as it is, and that the only way to move
forward is with a single, new, community project.

> There are two people who have said to me that they will
> block it regardless of technical merit (and neither was
> Stephen).

Do you really think that the Community would permit something important to
be blocked for no technical merit?  You've already seen and agreed to my
comments on -1 vetoes.  Does that sound like an approach doesn't deal with
technical merit?

> I could continue to list the problems. Many committers seem
> to think that consensus == majority vote

Adopt the ASF policies by reference, and they tell you exactly how the
process works.  If there is a problem in process, it will be worked out by
the larger Community.

> until recently all management decisions required 100%
> of us onboard but now we have seen a number of votes
> pushed through with a simple majority

Majority vote is the ASF policy with respect to procedural issues, not
technical matters.  If the application of majority rule on procedural issues
wasn't clear before (it was not to me, by the way), it is clear now from the
revised documents.  And now I know where to go if I have an issue
interpreting the policy documents.

My philosophy is simple: an ASF project is governed by ASF rules.  Those are
the rules.  'nuf said.  If they are to be changed, change them at the ASF
level.  In the meantime, adopted them.

> in short enough time frame to stop any possibility
> of people thinking things through.

That was wrong, people have said as much, and people are on guard against it

> Someone recently said something along the lines of "avalon bad as
> forks are seen as path forward" or similar which characterises
> how bad a situation it has got.

I think that is a paraphrase of my comment in "How NOT to Move Forward", and
I agree that the situation has gotten bad.

> When new people start to associate these experiments with
> so heavily negative concepts (aka forks and code ownership)
> does that not indicate to you that there is problems.

Since I'm the one who said it, the answer is YES.

> Removing all one man code bases would effectively fix
> the problem in many ways. If you have a better idea
> then please share.

Leave Avalon 4 alone, create the new avalon CVS module.  Start as you intend
to go on, and adopt into it as a Community, supported by a Community, fixed
as a Community.

	--- Noel

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message