geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager
Date Thu, 15 Jun 2006 03:41:58 GMT
Sure.  I especially look forward to the constructive feedback from
users.  I have some thoughts to add to that thread that came from a
user at one of our recent talks.

Thanks,
    Aaron

On 6/14/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> I started this thread and at this point I think it has outlived its usefulness.
>
> Aaron, I for one would like to say that my frustration that started the monster was fueled
by about
> 3 hours sleep and the right combination of responses on the thread.  I can't say the
frustrations
> weren't real as they were but I think the thread has gotten off track.
>
> You are not an evil immoral person.  You're a smart and creative developer that I imagine
is more
> focused on doing than perhaps taking other things into consideration.  I forget to shave,
I have
> lapses in judgement and I imagine there are those that can say I use colourful language
that is not
> normally part of my vocabulary.  Am I evil and immoral, no (at least I hope not).
>
> At this point I'd like us all to walk away from the thread with some food for thought
and some
> changes in the way we interact.  Could I have been more pedantic on dates for the release?
> Administration was not one of the gifts I received.  Could you have communicated the
geronimoplugins
> thing earlier and solicited feedback; sure.
>
> I'll offer this olive branch if your willing.  Let's work together to get the couple
of things that
> make sense for Apache as plugins setup on our site.  Let's fix the problem Dain so aptly
pointed out
> that we are beating to death and could have solved 10 times.  I got some really good
feedback on the
> plugins from a customer, er... hmmm..., a user, yeah that's it, a user :) that they thought
would
> make it really useful to them.  I'll start a separate thread on that.
>
> As the policeman said at the scene of the accident, "Ok folks, move along, there is nothing
to see
> here anymore."
>
> Matt
>
> Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > On 6/14/06, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Jeff,
> >>
> >> All I'm saying is I don't care if IBM puts up
> >> http://www.ibm.com/wasce/plugins, I also don't care if you put up a
> >> http://virtuas.com/geronimo/plugins site.
> >>
> >> Now the default link issue is something else.  Can we point it by
> >> default at some Apache machines by default?  I'm sure Aaron would not
> >> mind, would you?
> >
> > Of course not.
> >
> >> We do things like this all the time.  Our maven builds are TOTALLY
> >> dependent on non asf hardware.  If ibiblio or codehaus go down, I
> >> think we would have some serious issues trying to build geronino and
> >> friends.  And I may be wrong but I think Aaron's site was similar in
> >> that it was just providing free hosting for artifacts.  Or an I wrong?
> >
> > You are not wrong.
> >
> > It's extremely difficult for me to understand how I am immoral for
> > providing a solution that the project needs.  I am utterly baffled by
> > why this is considered to a commercial site taking advantage of a
> > charity effort.  And needless to say, I am totally at a loss for how
> > putting the work into providing a plugin repository equates to saying
> > that my contributions outweight anybody else's.  Finally, it's not at
> > all clear to me what rewards the repository host will reap.
> >
> > Jeff, I must be stupid.  Explain to me like I'm a two year old why I'm
> > immoral, taking advantage of a charity effort, indicating that my
> > contributions outweight anybody's, and please please, tell me how to
> > reap the rewards of operating a Maven 2 repository.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >   Aaron
> >
> >> On 6/14/06, Jeff Genender <jgenender@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hiram Chirino wrote:
> >> > > I wouldn't care..  And I don't understand why anyone else would
> >> either?
> >> >
> >> > I think Matt was trying to make a point.
> >> >
> >> > I respect the fact that it does not bother you, but it bothers others
> >> > here.  That, in-and-of itself, should be enough to stop and think about
> >> > what we are doing as a team...and think about how our actions affect
> >> > each other.
> >> >
> >> > Although injecting that site into G may not be "wrong" per-se, it
> >> > clearly falls in a gray area that should have raised enough discomfort
> >> > that discussion probably should have preceded the action.  Call me a
> >> > moral guy, but I would have lost sleep if I placed "virtuas.com" in the
> >> > server as the default plugin site without any discussion...but that is
> >> > just me.
> >> >
> >> > To be more poignant, this is supposed to be an open source application
> >> > server.  It's probably not fair to any other committer, user,
> >> developer,
> >> > Apache member, what have you...if someone's commercial site becomes a
> >> > default link in something that is supposed to represent a charity
> >> effort
> >> > without open discussion.  I think people perceive that they are being
> >> > exploited...again maybe that's just me.
> >> >
> >> > I don't believe Aaron's contributions outweigh anyone else's on this
> >> > project, and I think anyone/everyone should have an opportunity to be
> >> > the default site.  So if we feel as a team that Aaron should reap the
> >> > rewards of being a default plugin, then its a decision we, as a
> >> > community/group/team, need to come to consensus on.
> >> >
> >> > That may not help you understand why it would bother anyone else, but I
> >> > had to offer up why it bothers me.
> >> >
> >> > Thats my penny's worth ;-)
> >> >
> >> > Jeff
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 6/9/06, Matt Hogstrom <matt@hogstrom.org> wrote:
> >> > >> Would it make any difference to anyone if IBM proposed that we
put
> >> > >> http://www.ibm.com/wasce/plugins
> >> > >> as the default option.  I think there would be many eye brows
raised
> >> > >> at that one.  Let's be
> >> > >> consistent in our interpretations.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Jeff Genender wrote:
> >> > >> > Bruce Snyder wrote:
> >> > >> >> On 6/9/06, Jeff Genender <jgenender@apache.org>
wrote:
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>> No Bruce, thats not it at all.  Its simply discussing
what he
> >> was
> >> > >> going
> >> > >> >>> to do.  This all comes back to the lack of communication
issue.
> >> > >> >> So you would have preferred that he send an email to
the list
> >> > >> >> explaining the work he was doing on the code?
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > I think it was clear what was wanted and
> >> needed...communication.  Lets
> >> > >> > go back to your statement that "we can agree to disagree"...we
are
> >> > >> > beating a dead horse here...
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> Bruce
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Hiram
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message