incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <>
Subject Re: what wicket is (was: Re: [VOTE] Accept Wicket into the Incubator)
Date Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:30:29 GMT
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 04:46:13AM -0700, Greg Stein wrote:
> >Whether this is the right way to do things is
> >debatable, but I would say now is not the right time for the incubator to 
> >start
> >having those kinds of debates.
> I'm not trying to start a debate, nor engaging in any debate. I
> offered my opinion.

C'mon greg, opinions that are not shared often start a debate! Offering
an opinion without wanting follow-up is kinda hard around here...

> The model sounds cool, but I don't happen to like
> it. I am fine explaining offlist cuz it really is irrelevant here, as
> you note.
> >Various ASF members like working this way, are
> >working this way, and are backing this proposal. Trust darwinism.
> More power to 'em. I get a vote just like any other Incubator PMC
> member. Please don't attempt to deny me that.

Wouldn't dare. You said something which read to me like "+0 pending FOO"
and my "trust darwinism" was ment more as a "don't worry about the 'pending'
stuff or reading my whole e-mail in detail, we'll be fine anyhow". I'm such
an arse with words.

> Just because I didn't +1
> the proposal doesn't mean you should try to coerce me into changing my
> vote.

Not trying to. But like anyone on this planet, the co-operative process
we use says that I'm completely free to try to if I wanted. If I was a
wicket developer and totally convinced of how it absolutely is the best
thing since sliced bread I would probably try to do that. Which is very
much a healthy response. Evangelism, baby!

> Darwin also says that proposals could be voted down :-)  (but
> I'm not even doing that... it's just a -0 for cryin' out loud)

Sssh! Speak softly, or you might provoke more discussion! :-P

> To be honest, I am rather amazed at the amount of text written because
> one single person votes -0 rather than +1. Seriously... wow. God
> forbid somebody votes -1. What happens then? Ten times as many words
> written to convince them of the error of their ways? What are we
> saying to people: don't vote anything but +1 or your inbox will get
> slammed? Follow the groupmind, or you shall be mailbombed? Personally,
> I'd prefer an environment MUCH more accepting of alternate votes --
> that means you'll actually *get* those votes, rather than people being
> quiet, too afraid to counter the majority.

You didn't just -1 or -0, you did so conditionally on not having some kind
of understanding of differences or something. I didn't care much for the
actual vote (its going to get in anyway), but the conditional was interesting
to me. I figured the same conditional might be true for other people as well
(wicket simply is a bit weird, and I'd just spent time figuring out *how* it
is weird) so it was quite worthy to spend an e-mail on it irrespective of any 
vote going on.

I personally couldn't be more accepting of -1s, especially when it concerns
things I don't have a stake in, haven't worked on, and haven't proposed, and if
this really is an environment that isn't similary accepting we should change
that, but I hardly see a mailbomb around here. Of course, we might have one
now because of self-fulfilling prophecy and all that ;)



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message