forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thorsten Scherler <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] decide the future of forrestdoc
Date Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:04:23 GMT
Disclaimer: I did/do not want to offend anyone in any word I wrote in
this mail. The persons are exchangeable in any moment, the pattern
however is the same. 

It is not about criticizing people but a pattern! 

On Fri, 2007-07-13 at 10:47 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> > I am away for a long long weekend from this afternoon.
> > We don't want to hold up Vincent, so if someone feels
> > that positive consensus is reached, then please start
> > that process to link up with last month's thread from
> > him and the Maven people. Otherwise please start a
> > Forrest vote for clarification.
> As far as I am concerned the general feel is positive at present.
> However, we need to leave a little more time to ensure Thorsten is
> able to object more strongly if he so desires. An alternative is that
> we give Vincent commit access here, however, that would require a
> vote.

Hold on, let us step back for a moment. 

I see it as follow (leaving out that Vincent is an ASF committer and
expressing he is acting for an ASF community (maven), I will attend this
part later):

Somebody expresses interest in whiteboard code. Two committer say that
they are willing to have a closer look on code (never reviewed in their
life) that has gone a long road to find forrest as current host.
Silence. Patches. Proposal to give it away to the one expressing
interest (submitting patches) because the patches have not been applied
within 48 hours, because the forrest community is to small.

How does this read? 

Being unilateral, leaving out the context, this are the facts (having a
unilateral view on things).

The question arise is, can we win a community member by going the extra
mile to get a grip on historical whiteboard code as community or do we
want to go give up trying to win communities member, giving code away?

Adding the part "Vincent being an ASF committer expressing he is acting
for an ASF community (maven)" is changing a WEE bit the situation. 

Can't we leverage? For now the scale for people that are sharing
interest it is about 2 forrest : 1 maven (and code still in forrest). It
is IMO ATM our duty to maintain the code. 

As soon as we see a wave of patches coming from the maven community we
may re think the situation, but for now I do not see the need. 

Point giving commit access, our policy is quite clear about it.

Being metaphorical: one good game does not bring you in the hall of

I personally love the idea of apache labs where all asf committer have
write access to all code of any lab. We have this situation with cocoon
and lenya, we can vote on including maven to this union. I guess, seeing
cocoon now using maven, the cocoon community could be interested in it

...but that is another topic.

> Vincent, are you reading this thread? If so can you liaise with the
> Maven community to see if they would like to accept the code into
> their SVN. Be aware that Forrest have not yet decided they will donate
> the code (see above), but if Maven don't want it you could save us
> some time.

My question is how many people are interested in maintain/develop the
code in the maven community?

Thorsten Scherler                       
Open Source Java                      consulting, training and solutions

View raw message