corinthia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jan i <>
Subject Re: Corinthia: ASF or GitHub?
Date Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:05:29 GMT
On 24 August 2015 at 10:20, Peter Kelly <> wrote:

> It’s become clear to me over the past few days that we’ve got some serious
> problems in this project in terms of agreement on issues surrounding the
> way it is run.
> First of all, I’d like to say that my personal reason for being involved
> with Corinthia and ASF is to produce high quality software as part of a
> strong community, for the public good. I judge our achievements ultimately
> on what we have been able to build, both in terms of the end product and
> the community of people involved. There are many places in which one can
> conduct open source projects, and I was attracted to bring this code into
> Apache and start a project here because I felt that it is the best place to
> conduct this development.
> ASF has many rules and policies, which have been developed and agreed to
> over a long period of time, and are built on sound reasoning and consensus.
> I fully support the idea that we should comply with all of these, and
> ensure we operating according to the Apache Way. My reading of the
> principles indicates to me that they are sound, and I would like to see
> Corinthia become a successful top-level project in time.
> However, I feel as though the project has been greatly distracted by a
> large amount of bureaucratic discussion which does not contribute in any
> positive way to the project, and in fact takes focus away from development
> and community building. Many of the “issues" raised by Dennis have only
> served to cause stress for myself and, I imagine, others as well. I
> consider these discussions a huge waste of time and energy, and drain on
> motivation. They put us at risk of scaring away new potential committers
> who just want to come here and help build something great.
> These problems have lead me to put a great deal of consideration into how
> to proceed - the most obvious alternative being to move the project to
> GitHub. Those who are actively involved in development of the software and
> documentation can continue as we have been so far, outside of ASF, without
> hindrance from those who wish to impose an unjustifiably strict
> interpretation of ASF rules to the detriment of the project. Motivation of
> team members (and specifically, developers) is crucial, and I place a
> higher priority on the success of this project and the community than I do
> on the venue in which it takes place.
> This project is only going to work if we, as a team, can find a way to
> avoid the petty arguments about minor issues, and focus on what matters. I
> believe this is achievable within ASF (as has been demonstrated by other
> projects) - but am not presently convinced it’s achievable in our current
> situation. If things continue the way they are, I’m honestly tempted to
> suggest we move development to GitHub.
> Let’s try and make this project success, however it needs to be done.
> Thoughts?
> —
> Dr Peter M. Kelly
> PGP key: <>
> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
> Hi Peter

I fully understand your pow, however I do hope that there other

Since I am deeply engaged in Corinthia and do not have many years of active
apache Mentoring, I decided
(after a talk with a co-mentor Daniel) to contact a mentor who have been
around for many years. I have not
yet received a recommendation, but he too said we have problems and saw
Dennis as not helping the project.

I would really not like to see the main developers abandon the project,
just to start an identical one on github, that is not what apache is about.

In apache the community is more important than code, and in the community
diversity is preferred. This means among others not everybody need to be
developers. It is of course also clear that having different people with
different goals in
a community calls for extra flexibility. When a community encounter people
(to say it politely) that do not fit, an effort
should be made to regain peace in the community, and explain that their
behavior is causing problems for
the community.

I agree with your comments about Dennis, and I think he has been given
ample time to become a productive part
of the community as well as a lot of explanations that his focus on rules
with a often own interpretation is not
wanted and actually is damaging for the community as a whole. However I
still would prefer if we do not split the
community. I did believe Dennis writes email with the best intentions, but
the emails he sent to at least 2 core
developers in private, being very negative against Peter and me, suggest
otherwise (I have not read the
mails, but the 2 persons have told me the content). Being against the 2
people who together do the majority of
the work, is hard to see as positive for the community.

I see a couple of ways to continue:
- Dennis changes behavior and become an asset for the community (this is my
preferred solution)
- Dennis decides to leave the project, or at the very least stop all mail
activities on our MLs
  (we cannot just go ahead and block him, that is not how it works)
- IPMC decides to change the PPMC in order to keep the project alive
- Act as nothing happened and just ignore Dennis (Dave suggestion)
  This willl still scare away new people, and seems unacceptable to some
core developers.

All the above actions will allow us to continue in apache.
- Dennis continues and most of the main developers leaves the proje

This should really be avoided, it will leave corinthia as an empty shell in
apache where e.g. Dennis can try to rebuild the project. It is also
breaking the community because of a single person, in my mind the community
should be stronger
than a single person.

I politely suggest, we all think a bit about the consequences of Peters
email, and give Dennis some room, to make up
his mind (this is of course not a demand to Dennis, but a simple idea, it
is totally up to Dennis how Dennis wants act in
the community).

jan i.

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