commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE] New component: Rational numbers
Date Wed, 22 Jun 2016 18:17:05 GMT
I wonder if we could reframe the way we are talking here.

I like that we have been fairly civilized.

I like that email let's me read and write at my own time. But we are going
in circles sometimes. With so many threads, it's hard to track it all.

I am not sure if a (video or not) conference call would help.

Maybe all that I am saying is that I should formalize my proposal (from an
earlier threads) and offer a VOTE/POLL with a list of choice where folks
order the list in their order and we use that result to move forward (see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting) So all we need now is
to agree on the shape of the table, I mean the list of choices.

Thoughts?

Gary



On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:

> From the Peanut Gallery,
>
> All of this discussion on (too many at once) [VOTE] threads suggest to me
> that the [VOTE]s are premature.
>
> I don't understand the inclination to conduct [VOTE]s here that are at
> best straw votes and generally serve to establish that there is no
> consensus because of all the qualifications that are placed on the few
> [VOTE]s that are apparently cast in the blur of discussions.
>
> I think the key matter is that there is not enough discussion to tease out
> consensus and even find opportunities for lazy consensus.  Then a [VOTE]
> becomes a formal ratification in those rare cases where such a thing is
> required (e.g., to back up a personnel action or take a resolution to the
> Board).
>
> I think these discussions about clustering/splitting the Commons Math
> components are very useful and interesting to observe.  The use of [VOTE]
> is worrisome and apparently useless other than for the attention it evokes.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Gary Gregory [mailto:garydgregory@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2016 08:30
> > To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] New component: Rational numbers
> >
> [ ... ]
> >
> > This (and new components VOTE thread) paints a more confusing picture
> > than
> > before to me.
> >
> > You are proposing to organize code into Commons Component/possible
> > TLP/Attic/Something based on the current knowledge of some participants,
> > including yourself, and I am grateful that you've been doing all this
> > work.
> > Part of me wants to stay out of the way and let the do-o-cracy play out
> > but
> > another part really feels this will be counter productive in the end
> > (not
> > to mention a lot of busy work.)
> >
> > As was mentioned by someone else before, people come and go, with
> > different
> > levels of expertise.
> >
> > For me, the keep-it-simple principle, not to mention least surprise says
> > to
> > keep whole the pile in one place, in Commons or as a TLP, either way.
> > Whether we use more than one Maven module here or as a TLP is a
> > different
> > matter and not relevant to the residence of the code base. We have other
> > Commons component that have multiple modules, no big deal.
> >
> > Gary
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message