commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gilles <>
Subject Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?
Date Thu, 04 Aug 2016 17:49:55 GMT
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:13:26 -0400, Artem Barger wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Ralph Goers 
> <>
> wrote:
>> > All I'm saying this is one of the problems within CM, ​which IMO 
>> only a
>> > symptom for more acute problem of missing community. Also as you 
>> can see
>> in
>> > ML archive I've tried several times to rise discussion around work 
>> I'm
>> > doing and also asked for PR review.
>> > And to be precise, right now the someone to apply is Gilles only, 
>> as far
>> as
>> > I'm getting situation correctly.
>> Any Commons committer can apply the patch. But to be honest, unless 
>> the
>> patch is somewhat obvious or is in a part of the code Gilles isn’t 
>> familiar
>> with, I would expect most everyone would wait for Gilles blessing.
> ​So if almost everyone supposed to wait until Gilles will accept it, 
> why
> Gilles initiatives of how project should be divided into separate
> independent modules could not be accepted? I mean what should happen
> effectively, to move things forward?  I was using CM for 
> implementation of
> different parts of my thesis work and I couldn't imagine to myself 
> that
> proposing improvements or new things related to CM base code will be 
> so
> hard.

 From reading this thread, it seems that people forgot (or did not
read the whole story from when were informed of the fork) that the
Commons Math team was reduced by more than 85% in a very short time
span. [Without any prior warning or attempt to resolve conflicts
(archives are proofs of that).]

I had made a summary of the situation:

After all the discussions, we eventually are back at square one: What
could be done previously with 5 or 6 long-time maintainers (and code
creators), all PMC members, and 2 or 3 additional team members, cannot
be done by me alone.   But PMC people continue to state that I am the
one to do the work (review contributions, "bless" them; from there,
nominate people, "grow a community", and in the mean time, apply all
the patches).

If this is indeed the case, then as Artem states pointedly, why can't
I *also* decide what is best for this embryo of a new community of

Again, nobody answered a simple question:  Why not create as many
components as any PMC member would fancy, and see how they fare in
the world of modules at large, rather than have non-contributors guess
at, or "feel", what is a good component?

As I stated many times, this IMO seems a contradiction with the "those
who do the work get to decide" purported Apache/Commons policy...

I'm willing to try avoiding what I deems where CM management mistakes.
I refuse to work under the old model.

If this PMC refuses to consider the experiment, it should be suggesting
alternatives (e.g. someone else willing to step forward and work under
the old model) or acknowledge that *it* (and not me) prefers to see the
CM code rot.


> Best regards,
>                       Artem Barger.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message