commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Paulo Gaspar" <paulo.gas...@krankikom.de>
Subject RE: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
Date Sat, 02 Feb 2002 18:11:42 GMT
> Huh.  That wasn't my read.  Peter's "-1" seemed to be a reaction to being
> told that since he wasn't in the 'STATUS file', what he said didn't much
> matter as to the release.

My read is that Peter wanted to make a point on how non committers should
not be allowed to vote on a commons project. He was talking about that all
the time

Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geirm@optonline.net]
> Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 3:11 PM
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> Subject: Re: [Logging] [VOTE] Commons Logging 1.0 Release
>
>
> On 2/2/02 6:50 AM, "Ted Husted" <husted@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > The vote was on a release, and the vote passed.
> >
> > An issue regarding attribution was resolved. The committers are still
> > honing some fine points, but the package is on it's way.
> >
> > Apparently, Peter feels that "I have been stymied by "committers" who
> > vetoed things but had never done
> > anywork and never intended doing any work on something. It aint
> > something I am not willing to invite again."
>
> Huh.  That wasn't my read.  Peter's "-1" seemed to be a reaction to being
> told that since he wasn't in the 'STATUS file', what he said didn't much
> matter as to the release.
>
> This statement about the STATUS file was indeed in error.
> However, I think
> his point was well made - in a meritocracy, he shouldn't have had the
> ability to do what he did.
>
> >
> > and so has problems with our politics.
> >
> > Personally, I would never permit any veto not based on the technical
> > merits stand.
>
> And how would you go about that?  You have no choice, do you?
>
> Is there anything that states that voting is based on technical merits?  I
> don't think so.  For example, you might not want to release something
> because you think the documentation isn't ready, or the timing is bad, or
> some such...
>
> > The Committers are a jury, but there is an avenue of
> > appeal. Happily, that avenue is rarely pursued.
> >
> > Since the purpose of ASF and Jakarta is to permit codebases to survive
> > their developers, it is not reasonable to say that you can only vote on
> > code that you developed. Eventually, we will all become custodians of
> > code that we did not create, but must support and maintain.
>
> Isn't it to survive their initial developers, to provide a
> mechanism through
> which a merit-based community can grow?
>
>
> I think that Peter demonstrated some serious issues, and we should address
> them.  I suppose that others don't think there is a problem - somone
> suggested that all is fine because of how well commons is doing.  I think
> success is a lagging indicator.
>
> geir
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr.                       geirm@optonline.net
> System and Software Consulting
> You're going to end up getting pissed at your software
> anyway, so you might as well not pay for it. Try Open Source.
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
>


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


Mime
View raw message