geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aaron Mulder" <>
Subject Re: Request change to RTC Process
Date Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:01:34 GMT
On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <> wrote:
> > Why are you so hung up on this?
> Because you did it under CTR and claimed that RTC wouldn't
> have made any difference.

What are you talking about?  When did I claim anything about what RTC
would or wouldn't have changed?

> CTR also says 'ideas are always RTC.'  You didn't offer
> any of the new concept up for discussion, you just went
> ahead and did it.  So it wasn't even done under the CTR
> rules.

I disagree.  I discussed the feature with a number of people, we
tossed a couple works in progress around, and then I checked it in.
If you want to say it should have been discussed with the whole
community, that's fine, that's constructive criticism.  If you change
the whole mechanics of the project because I didn't discuss it with
enough people, that's just ridiculous.

> > It certainly doesn't seem sensible to put a major crimp in project
> > progress in order to assure that no code goes in that hasn't been
> > pre-discussed (except, again, for a bug fix release like 1.1.1).
> Your opinion.  Other opinions vary.

How can you assert anyone's opinion but your own?  Shall we take a
vote?  Isn't that the Apache way?  Where in the meritocracy and Apache
way does it say that the PMC chair makes all the decisions?

> > Because Geronimo doesn't exist in a vacuum.  We've started
> > significantly after competing open-source application servers such as
> > JOnAS, JBoss, and GlassFish.
> So the goal of Geronimo isn't to be good, or the best, but
> to compete with other offerings in the same space?  I think
> perhaps we should poll the entire project on that.

Is the very definition of "be the best" that it exceeds the competing
offerings in the same space?  If we're lacking major features that
they offer and that developers are looking for, isn't that the
textbook definition of "not the best"?

> > This is the time to hurry, not the time to stall.
> Considering the strain that the 'hurrying' has put on the
> project, I think it is most *definitely* time to slow
> down and take stock.
> > I'll take a breather once we have full clustering support, a lively
> > community of plugins, and a solid set of Java EE 5 features.
> Don't assume that everyone else wants to go at the same
> pace you do, has the same goals you have, or believes that
> the end justifies the means.

Fine -- let's take a vote.  I'm all about that.


View raw message