incubator-couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Newson <robert.new...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Transactional _bulk_docs
Date Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:31:49 GMT
fwiw, I'd like to see these decisions proposed, discussed and resolved
on the mailing list. I appreciate it's slower than IRC, though. I
thought using mailing lists was the mandated "Apache way" of doing
these things, it certainly appears to be on other projects I follow
(Lucene, for example). To restate, I didn't think it was a permitted
option to use IRC to make important project decisions. Is there at
least a transcript of the IRC decision(s)?

B.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Robert Dionne
<dionne@dionne-associates.com> wrote:
> My sense is that the approach to design in CouchDB is very bottoms up. I
> applaud that and encourage it and wholeheartedly agree with Alan Perlis
> about building software top down *except* the first time. We all know that
> very little great software was ever built top down designed by boxologists
> armed with UML diagrams. I think CouchDB is at a key point where it needs to
> continue to be driven by a small core group of dedicated passionate
> programmers.
>
> Please note that I'm in no way commenting on the make up of that group.
>
> I'm not very familiar with the ASF "process", excuse my ignorance, but I
> find the IRC enormously useful and find mailing list threads can be too
> unwieldy.
>
> I guess it's because I'm not a fan of top down design. I see the code itself
> as the design, and the debugging, reworking, and documenting of the code as
> the construction phase.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bob
>
> Robert Dionne
> Chief Bittwiddler
> dionne@dionne-associates.com
> 203.231.9961
>
>
>
> On Feb 5, 2009, at 6:14 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> [sending second time, as I see my first is stuck in moderation, and I want
>> to reply in a timely manner]
>>
>> Sure, ideally.
>>
>> But you can't have "everyone" together at the same time on IRC, where at
>> the ASF, we define "everyone" to be, well, "everyone", not you and the 4
>> others on the PMC.
>>
>> I see 579 people on the user list.  I see 294 people on the dev list.
>>  Just focusing on the dev list, that's 290 people, or 98.6% of people
>> supposedly interested in CouchDB development, that had zero opportunity to
>> see, review and participate in the discussion.  Further, there's now zero
>> chance that any future project participant can look back to understand
>> design decision and philosophy.  No institutional memory.  Your goal,
>> besides building a great software project, should be to get the community to
>> the point where you can step back and do other things w/o material effect on
>> the community, and that requires information like this to be somewhere
>> accessible.
>>
>> And unlike Ted, I don't agree that a pointer to an IRC log is sufficient
>> to represent a "done decision", and he may not have meant that anyway.
>>  Sure, I can see a chat starting on IRC about a topic, but I'd hope that one
>> person would force the move from IRC to the mail list - and at that point,
>> maybe posting a pointer to the *initial* discussion log would be useful.
>>  And after that, discussion is on the mail list.
>>
>> I think IRC logs are a very poor substitute to mail traffic (and yes, I
>> grok the downside of async communications).  A primary one reason that they
>> are very "in the moment" - if you are in the conversation, it's easy to stay
>> in, but after, when things cool and the context of the moment isn't there,
>> it's neigh impossible.  You also can't hit reply and quote a piece for
>> others to see and discuss, further broadening the discussion.
>>
>> What got me engaged on this wasn't the decision itself (only because it
>> was a secret decision), but -like Ted - the mode of operation.  It seemed
>> that a very dedicated, engaged and interested community member had to
>> privately petition the PMC for redress on a technical decision that none of
>> us had any awareness of, nor a chance to review.  And IMO, from a guy that
>> probably should be a committer and PMC member to boot!
>>
>> (By the way - from my count, not all PMC members are even on the PMC's
>> private@ list, so I have *no clue* where project private discussion - like
>> new committer candidates - are even discussed....)
>>
>> geir
>>
>> On Feb 5, 2009, at 2:11 AM, Damien Katz wrote:
>>
>>> Ideally yes, but real time communication with everyone together is damn
>>> useful.
>>>
>>> -Damien
>>>
>>> On Feb 5, 2009, at 2:07 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
>>>
>>>> Uh, project decisions are supposed to be made in the public mailing
>>>> lists...
>>>>
>>>> Ted
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 6:51 PM, Damien Katz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This decision was discussed and made on IRC.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Damien
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 9:26 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> can you point me to a reference to where the PMC made this decision?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm interested in the subject for it's own sake, and I'm also
>>>>>> interested in figuring out where decisions are made in this project,
since I
>>>>>> didn't see this one go by on a mail list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 9:13 PM, Damien Katz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Geir, there was a decision made by the PMCs to change the transaction
>>>>>>> model to support partitioned databases. It is a change I am currently
>>>>>>> working on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Damien
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and original question #2?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 8:38 PM, Antony Blakey wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 05/02/2009, at 12:02 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) where is this being forwarded from ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I sent it to the PMC.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Antony Blakey
>>>>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>>>>> CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
>>>>>>>>> Ph: 0438 840 787
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> A Buddhist walks up to a hot-dog stand and says, "Make
me one with
>>>>>>>>> everything". He then pays the vendor and asks for change.
The vendor says,
>>>>>>>>> "Change comes from within".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message