geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager
Date Fri, 09 Jun 2006 21:43:52 GMT


Bruce Snyder wrote:
> On 6/9/06, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sigh! :( Looks like all efforts are down the drain.
>>
>> On 6/9/06, Aaron Mulder <ammulder@alumni.princeton.edu> 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 don't think that an all list requirement is appropriate.  We have to allow for people having

conversations that are not privy to everyone's consumption.  However, where those discussion
turn 
into a collusion about how the project should unfold then I think it has turned to an innapropriate

level.

> 
> I really am seriously confused because of so many mixed messages from
> so many people about this topic. Please help me understand.
> 
> Bruce

Mime
View raw message