geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <>
Subject Re: [RTC] Clarification please from the PMC
Date Fri, 30 Jun 2006 15:01:22 GMT
This reflects my sentiments as well.


Matt Hogstrom wrote:
> Jason Dillon wrote:
>>> I second your opinions, but that's how we operate and I can't do much
>>> regarding this matter other than to spare some time and vote at least.
>>> I think I'm not alone thinking that RTC is very painful, but some see
>>> it as a remedy of our troublesome happenings in the past. We'll see
>>> how it work out. The only thing I can do is to do my best to speed it
>>> up a bit and be more active in RTCs (given my manager doesn't get me
>>> swamped with other daily tasks that took me away for the past weeks).
>>> Not mentioning there're lots of bugs reported.
>> I think that if the Apache Geronimo community is actually 
>> self-governing as I believed it was, then there is something that can 
>> be done about this.
>> You are definitely not alone in thinking that RTC is painful (and 
>> non-functional I would like to add).
>>>> I'm confused now... how can one send a RTC w/o having a patch or
>>>> patches for others to review?
>>> Yes, you might've been confused as it's Matt's statement nor mine and
>>> thus the origin of your confusion, isn't it?
>> Honestly... I don't know... but I am confused ;-)
> My point was that for very complicated changes like M1 -> M2 a note 
> outlining the proposed action should not require a fully baked patch.  
> Perhaps I misstated.
>>> I have never been as active in open source projects (Apache Geronimo
>>> and OpenEJB in particular) as I should've been. I haven't been able to
>>> manage my daily workload wisely and  spare more time to work on these
>>> OSSes at nights. At this point I'm completely overwhelmed with other
>>> stuff meaning I don't have as much time as is required from me to
>>> contribute.
>> It happens... which is why we have a community of developers to help 
>> pick up the slack.  Unfortunately some decisions have been made which 
>> limit the abilities of the bulk of the community and force the 
>> minorities to play a much bigger part, which unfortunately most have 
>> not stepped up to do.
> Jason, RTC was implemented because the PMC chair and the Board felt 
> that the G community was not functioning in an open fashion.  I don't 
> want to repeat that whole debate as its been debated and nothing 
> positive will come from rehashing it.
> RTC has improved communications I think is achieving its desired 
> effect.  Yes, the side effect is slowing down some development.  I 
> know its frustrating but if we work well together through the process 
> changes (RTC) we will be moving back to CTR.  Complaining about RTC 
> won't get us there. Yes, we're all frustrated and we all will get 
> through this working together.
>>> I see it as a threat to me being a PMC member. Do you
>>> think I should step down having failed so often?
>> Not at all.  I don't believe that you should step down at all.  You 
>> are one of the few PMC folks that is actually trying to keep up with 
>> the RTC and I certainly don't want to see those numbers reduced.
>> As I mentioned before, I was not aiming my comments at anyone in 
>> particular.  I have just been quietly ignoring the situation for 
>> sometime, and feel that I can not do that anymore... it is not in my 
>> nature.
> I agree that Jacek is doing great.  Collectively we all make this work 
> and all contributions great and small move us forward.
>>> I remember having discussion about a distinction between a committer 
>>> and PMC member. Some believed there's none.
>> I'm not sure that there is (or should be) much difference.
>>> It's not my decision to activate RTC, which as far as I understand has
>>> never proven itself to be successful, but that's reality we need to 
>>> live in.
>> If our community is self-governing and the bulk of the community is 
>> in opposition to this rule, why then does that community need to live 
>> with it?
> See above about the Board and PMCs perspective of our community dynamics.
>> BTW, that is my opinion... I have not performed any poll to see which 
>> parts of our community actually is in favor of RTC.  I would suggest 
>> that most folks agree that improved and more frequent communication 
>> is desired... but I also suggest that RTC in its current incarnation 
>> is NOT the best way to achieve those goals.
> Its moved us back from where we were at.  Certainly past where we 
> should be but I'm optimistic that we'll move back to the center.
>>> I believe, though, that it won't kill the project, but strengthen.
>> That all depends on how long it goes not for...
>> IMO, the longer it does, the more chances are that the end-result 
>> will be a more and more defunct community.
>>  * * *
>> Thanks for taking the time to respond.  I apologize if my comments 
>> stir your frustration... but I felt and fell like I have to say 
>> something, to play my part in this community.
>> --jason

View raw message