geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <>
Subject Re: [RTC] Clarification please from the PMC
Date Fri, 30 Jun 2006 17:40:41 GMT
Guys, I feel like I am allowed to state my opinions.

I am not complaining (and a bit insulted that you think I am), but I  
believe that RTC is harmful for a few reasons.

I also feel like some responses to mails I have sent are basically  
that I should shut-up (my words), which I do not appreciate.



On Jun 30, 2006, at 5:35 AM, 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