geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Davanum Srinivas" <>
Subject Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager
Date Fri, 09 Jun 2006 22:03:00 GMT

If you are again asking for my input here it is....It's plain and
simple. If there is a forum for discussion, it should be open as much
as possible. If it's not possible because of either monetary or space
constraints, then at least there should be some notification whereby
one can give their input on topics at hand via email and/or IRC.

If i had known about significant discussions, i'd have brought up the
topic of how/what my thoughts are on a JAX-WS implementation and the
lack of a credible JAXB2 implementation. So the "Notes from JavaOne"
[1] would have brought out the problems we will be facing implementing
both JAX-WS and JAX-RPC (and using a single SAAJ impl) which could
have been discussed at this forum. I really have to thank David who
followed up by initiating discussion on axis-dev [2] after JavaOne.

Clearly there was a private list of people who were invited and an
agenda was drawn up which was not shared with the whole dev team
either privately or publicly. Typically in all Apache projects, we
call it a F2F, pre announce it, discuss via email/wiki some of the
items before hand and thrash out the rest in person.

All it would have taken is *ONE* lousy email asking for input on items
to be discussed either publicly or privately to all committers. Hiding
behind facade's like "oh, it was a vendor meeting" or "meeting
friends" or "We just left out just one person" or "Oh, There was a
BOF" or a thousand other excuses don't count. All you need to think
about is whether you are being fair to everyone who is engaged in the
project or not. By "bring the community together", hope you don't mean
that we just go back to our merry ways and not learn a lesson or two
from the strong actions by the pmc chair.

Guys, there is something wrong we are doing. Let's fix it!!!!!!!!



On 6/9/06, Bruce Snyder <> wrote:
> On 6/9/06, Davanum Srinivas <> wrote:
> > Sigh! :( Looks like all efforts are down the drain.
> >
> > On 6/9/06, Aaron Mulder <> wrote:
> > > I don't see what's wrong with a group of folks interested in Gernoimo
> > > getting together to talk about Geronimo.  So long as it's positioned
> > > as discussion not decision-making, of course -- which, as I recall, it
> > > was.
> Dims, statements like that don't work to bring the community together,
> they only cause more animosity. Let's try to move beyond the jabs and
> let the people with unresolved issues air their concerns so that they
> can work together.
> Yet again I'm now thoroughly confused on this whole topic. Does this
> mean that nobody can even talk about Geronimo unless it's on-list in
> some way? Does this mean if someone at a client site or a local JUG or
> anywhere asks me questions about Geronimo that I must either tell them
> to ask on the list because I'm not allowed to talk about it or post my
> conversation to the list after the fact?
> I really am seriously confused because of so many mixed messages from
> so many people about this topic. Please help me understand.
> Bruce
> --
> perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
> );'
> Apache Geronimo -
> Apache ActiveMQ -
> Apache ServiceMix -
> Castor -

Davanum Srinivas :

View raw message