geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Genender <>
Subject Re: [RTC] Clarification please from the PMC
Date Fri, 30 Jun 2006 00:09:18 GMT

Jason Dillon wrote:
> Its a sad time when members of the community are scared to state their
> minds in fear of reprisal.

Interesting comment, isn't this what started all of this to begin with?

>  * * *
> I was never very good at math... that is what calculators are for. :-P
> --jason
> On Jun 29, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>> I'd like to +1 this, but I'm too scared to due to the political
>> ramifications.
>> Yesterday, a PMC member told me that the only thing he could compare
>> Gernimo to was Avalon, where certain personalities were so destructive
>> that someone was kicked out of Apache altogether.
>> You do the math.
>> Thanks,
>>     Aaron
>> On 6/29/06, Jason Dillon <> wrote:
>>> NOTE: My comments below are not directed towards anyone in
>>> particular... mostly this just expresses my frustration with some of
>>> the more harmful politics that Apache Geronimo has picked up over the
>>> past few months...
>>> > Although RTC has slowed down development a bit (or even more), it
>>> > will pay off very
>>> > soon.
>>> I think "slowed down development a bit (or even more)" is an
>>> understatement.  I believe that RTC has the development team running
>>> through molasses.  And in some cases has caused some patches and
>>> issues to get stuck in the tar.  Not really the types of things you
>>> want from a vibrant, active and positive community.
>>> > We need to be very patient until more committers become PMC
>>> > members and their votes are binding.
>>> This will not remedy the fact that RTC rules dictate that patches
>>> must be applied and tested before a +1 can be given, which normally
>>> would have happened once when the *trusted* developer has applied the
>>> patch.  But now we need a gang of people to apply the patch, which
>>> usually means dropping any other work they were doing to get a clean
>>> tree and then apply the patch, pray that the build succeeds in a
>>> reasonable amount of time, running through a test case or two and
>>> then blowing it all away to get back to the work that they were
>>> actually doing before.
>>> I fail to see how this will increase anything but frustration of
>>> developers to have to jump through those hoops to get changes
>>> made.... maybe it will increase communication about how frustrating
>>> RTC is though ;-)
>>> > Painful, but in the end it might boost development significantly.
>>> How will this boost anything?
>>> > AFAIUI, the whole point of RTC is to ensure communication through
>>> > dev/user mailing lists rather than in closed circles.
>>> I don't understand how, dropping what I am working on, applying
>>> patches, running tests and then coaxing the few PMC members with
>>> votes will ensure more communication.  In may respects I think it
>>> actually hinders communication, as people will just shy away from
>>> applying changes or from proposing to make new changes.  RTC, IMO is
>>> the road to complacency.
>>> >> It would seem to me that the process for RTC would be to send an
>>> >> RTC about the Maven 1 -> 2
>>> >> conversion with some preliminary ideas.
>>> I'm confused now... how can one send a RTC w/o having a patch or
>>> patches for others to review?
>>>   * * *
>>> RTC is crippling Apache Geronimo's ability to become a vibrant player
>>> in the app-server space.  RTC has made us a Red Tape Community, where
>>> it takes weeks to get trivial changes implemented.
>>> The problem is made worse by the fact that most of the PMC members
>>> who we are supposed to coax into following RTC and voting in the
>>> changes are simply not available.  Not all of them mind you, but out
>>> of 10 PMC members I can only think of a few who have had time or
>>> desire to participate in the RTC and actually give their binding
>>> votes.  IMO the only way that RTC could possibly with is if the PMC
>>> members drop anything else they are working on and devote their time
>>> to applying patches, building and testing... BUT, I don't see that
>>> happening.  The people who are actually doing the work are for the
>>> most part not PMC members.  The people who are actually applying
>>> these patches are not PMC members.  Lucky enough though, I think that
>>> there are at least 3 PMC members who are being active, so there is a
>>> shot for us to get work done... its just going to be really slow
>>> moving.  At this rate, maybe we will have EJB3 support out by the
>>> time that EJB4 is dominant... or get out build working on m2 by the
>>> time m3 is out...
>>> :-\
>>> --jason

View raw message