geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <l...@toolazydogs.com>
Subject Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager
Date Sat, 10 Jun 2006 04:54:27 GMT
Thanks.  I just sent a note to Dims before I noticed he forwarded it on 
to the group:

Matt made two comments that reminded me of why it was a bad meeting all 
around.

1) People explicitly said that they wanted to be at the meeting and they 
were excluded.
2) The cost of a lunch should never be the deciding factor in a meeting.

I take my comments back about the meeting.


Regards,
Alan


Jeff Genender wrote:
> Great email from Alan.  Alan, feel free to share these feelings with the
> group.  I am inspired that you have similar thoughts as many of us (not
> that I ever even questioned that ;-) ].
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jeff
>
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>   
>> Alan,
>>
>> Forwarding to dev with your permission. Let's just bring all issues
>> into the open and use this opportunity to vent, clear our heads and
>> hopefully help put our best foot forward from now on.
>>
>> thanks,
>> dims
>>
>> On 6/9/06, Alan D. Cabrera <adc@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> This is a private email so that I have things clear in my head.  If you
>>> think that it's useful to post to the dev group, that's cool.  You have
>>> my permission to forward this email on to whomever you'd like.
>>>
>>> Davanum Srinivas wrote, On 6/9/2006 3:03 PM:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Bruce,
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>         
>>> How was Aaron's email [1] not a notification?  Is there a better way to
>>> provide notes on what one talked about at a conference?
>>>
>>>       
>>>> 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.
>>>>         
>>> You still have time to discuss.  What in [1] made you think that the
>>> notes were carved in stone?
>>>
>>>       
>>>> 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.
>>>>         
>>> Yep.  That was a not too good.  But people can still discuss things even
>>> afterward, no?  People who have these private meetings run the risk of
>>> having to discuss the round if issues a second time if they are not
>>> inclusive.
>>>
>>>       
>>>> 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.
>>>>         
>>> I think that what you see are individuals' interpretation of what the
>>> get-together was for themselves.  If everyone had the *exact* same story
>>> line then, that would have been truly suspicious.
>>>
>>> I gotta say.  I'm kinda scratching my head about this. I was at the
>>> meeting for the last few minutes but was an active participant in its
>>> formation and I think that it was handled "ok", not great, but "ok".
>>> Nothing was decided and things were reported back to the group.
>>>
>>> Now, compare this to the plugins.com where actual code started going in
>>> and I got grief from fellow PMCers for even pointing it out.  I learned
>>> that this came about from a discussion at TSS and it was never
>>> publically reported to anyone.  This is what everyone should be craping
>>> their pants about.
>>>
>>> Bringing the two, to be sure there are others, together points out that
>>> Geronimo is in serious trouble.  Pointing out that single J1 meeting
>>> makes it seem kinda "shrill".
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>       
>>>> 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!!!!!!!!
>>>>         
>>> +1
>>>
>>>       
>>>> [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=geronimo-dev&m=114807250831613&w=2
>>>> [2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=114840811100003&r=1&w=2
>>>>         
>>> I am not disagreeing that Geronimo is in serious trouble.  I totally
>>> agree with you.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alan
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>     

Mime
View raw message