db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Van Couvering <David.Vancouver...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: VOTE: Shared Components Guidelines, Version 27 of the page
Date Fri, 21 Oct 2005 22:43:46 GMT
OK, thanks.  I'll try this again... :)


----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel John Debrunner <djd@debrunners.com>
Date: Friday, October 21, 2005 3:00 pm
Subject: Re: VOTE: Shared Components Guidelines, Version 27 of the page

> David Van Couvering wrote:
> > Hm, I was assuming the Wiki would be around and data isn't lost; any
> > revision is available through the Info link on a page, and I 
> think even
> > deleted pages remain in the system.  How is the Wiki less 
> "durable" than
> > an email archive?  Is it not being backed up?  I would actually 
> think> it's a better repository because you can actually find stuff 
> much easier
> > than having to trawl through email lists, and it can be formatted so
> > that it's easier to read and follow.  Also, other Apache sites have
> > policies on their web pages, which I'm sure were voted on (see for
> > example the link I have to the Jakarta Commons versioning 
> policy).  Do
> > our policies have to be in email form only?
> I'm not being clear. Let me try to be explicit.
> - A proposal can be discussed on the lists and summarized in a 
> wiki, or
> even developed on a wiki along with the e-mail discussion.
> - I believe the vote e-mail for the policy must include, in-line, the
> text of the policy that we are voting on.
> - If the policy passes then it can be reflected on a web-site, in a
> wiki, in a blog, wherever.
> - However, the official record of what was voted on, in case there are
> any questions later on, is the e-mail thread in the archives.
> > I'd like to challenge that the Wiki site can not be part of the 
> official> repository for an Apache project.  We have email 
> archives, we have SVN,
> >  we have our web site, those are all official.  What is it about the
> > Wiki that makes it different?   I agree with you that pointing to a
> > mutable page for a vote doesn't work, but if I can point to a 
> specific> version, I'm not sure what is missing.
> What makes it different is that e-mail communication and e-mail 
> archivesare the way that decisions are made and archived on Apache 
> projects.That's clearly understood and is a common trait for all 
> Apache projects,
> and covered in the "how it works" section of apache.org. I'm 100% sure
> that the ASF makes sure it's e-mail archives are secure and 
> recoverable.
> Wiki's are a new feature,  I have no idea how the ASF infrastructure
> views them, it's interesting to note I can't find any mention of 
> them in
> any of the apache.org 'how it works' pages.
> > The quote "communication is done through mailing lists" -- I 
> think the
> > intent is more about the spirit of communication through Internet
> > mechanisms than a strict rule about a particular Internet tool, 
> IMHO.  I
> > don't know if it's right to be exclusive when other and perhaps 
> better> communication Internet communication mechanisms can be used 
> to improve
> > the quality of communication.  I thought the main point was that
> > communications are recorded and public, vs. private and not 
> recorded.> If we have a voting page, the policy is stored on the 
> Wiki, pointing a
> > page with a specific version number, and the vote discussion 
> happens on
> > email, what is missing?
> I think the intent is mailing-lists, and there is some project that
> explicitly states this (can't find it though), and states it in an
> apache-wide way, not specific to that project.
> I think it's good to ask if the wiki is an approved archive for an
> apache project, I'm just not sure it is seen that way by the ASF in 
> general.Dan.

View raw message