gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [vote] turning off nagging until we feel gump is solid enough for that
Date Wed, 01 Dec 2004 16:27:54 GMT
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> At 03:44 PM 12/1/2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> 
>> I think it's better if we start to nag ourselves first and see how we 
>> can increase the signal/noise ratio before we go back public.
> 
> 
> It's not only about gump's signal/noise ratio but the attitude adopted
> when things break. Allowing unaware developers to become aware that
> things broke (or may brake) offers tangible benefits.
> 
> Once the dialog is triggered, it should go both ways. Depicting gump
> offenders as morons won't get us anywhere.
> 
> In the past, the social algorithm for gump has been:
> 
> 1) Gump checks for dependency issues.
> 
> 2) If gump detects problems, social pressure is applied on the
> offender until the offenders yield. Otherwise, the offender is
> depicted as an insensitive moron.
> 
> I suggest you review this social algorithm.

Gump spot a problem that was caused by log4j that impacted velocity.

"cause" and "impact" are used without negative connotation, just an 
evidence of a fact.

This problem lasted for 35 runs.

This triggered concerns in the gump list as Niclas decided to quit for 
that, feeling that the system is simply too fragile.

People's reaction was to intervene and Eric proposed to change the 
velocity dependency from log4j to log4j-12.

On the other side, I decided that it might have been a trivial change so 
I contacted Geir and asked him to change.

Note how, up to this point, you nor log4j were not involved at all.

Geir rushed to fix the problem and found out that it was harder to fix 
than he expected, because log4j didn't deprecate the contract in a 
released version before breaking it.

Again, this is a *FACT*, not a judgement.

*He* asked you to make a smoother transition for that contract change, 
in order to allow a smoother transition for velocity users once log4j 
1.3 is released.

Your response was that you don't have the resources to do that.

At this point, our reaction was to change the dependency between 
velocity and log4j so that we could move on.

If you have a better social algorithm that would stop you from feeling 
insulted, let us know what it is.

Our goal is not to insult people or to create trouble.

-- 
Stefano.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@gump.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@gump.apache.org


Mime
View raw message