cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Fagerstrom <dani...@nada.kth.se>
Subject Re: trunk broken?
Date Tue, 26 Jun 2007 20:45:00 GMT
Joerg Heinicke skrev:
> On 15.06.2007 09:32, Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
> 
>> And what some other people here seem to ignore is the increasing cost 
>> for our community to stay behind the rest of the world.
>>
>> And, BTW, what is your take on our Continuum problems?
> 
> Daniel, I don't think it makes any sense to discuss this anymore.

Joerg, it will make sense to discuss this issue each time your veto 
creates an obstacle. And as Java 1.4 grows more and more irrelevant, 
these discussions will be more and more frequent.

> We 
> rate the costs of losing actual users and "stay behind the rest of the 
> world" differently.

To be more specific: you rate the cost differently from the rest of 
those who voted.

Citing from http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html:

"To prevent vetos from being used capriciously, they must be accompanied 
by a technical justification showing why the change is bad (opens a 
security exposure, negatively affects performance, etc.). A veto without 
a justification is invalid and has no weight."

As your motivation is of non-technical nature, it is clearly a border case.

As it is a question about rating different kinds of community costs, 
each committers unique view add relevant information to the decision. I 
find it rather arrogant to act if as your particular view is more worth 
than all the rest of the committers views together.

> Let's get 2.2 out of the door ...

Sure, and one of the obstacles right now is that we don't have any 
continuous integration testing that makes sure that 2.2 works with Java 
1.4. So I repeat my question: what is your take on our Continuum problems?

===

But the most important reason for me to return to your veto is about 
community health. This is the first time in the history of the 
Cocoon-community that I'm aware of, that we have a unresolved veto, 
where consensus gathering have failed.

One of the more important learnings from open source is that the 
community is far smarter than the individual. While our community have 
proved to be incredibly robust historically, that could change if we 
leave core values of our community culture, and start to consider vetos 
without consensus gathering as something that is OK.

/Daniel

Mime
View raw message