incubator-kitty-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthew Sacks <>
Subject Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for Jan 2012 ([ppmc])
Date Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:53:09 GMT
I'll take a look at jira once more and see if we can't get to a rc. Are we good on the Groovy
version and that's proving successful for this application?


On Jan 12, 2012, at 4:32 PM, Alessandro Novarini <> wrote:

> Hi Matthew, hi all,
> Glad to read you again :)
> As I said, as far as development is concerned, count me in.
> Regards,
> Ale
> On 12/01/2012 22:36, wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> I thought I would chime in to put things in perspective a bit.
>> The original goal was originally to find a universal, fast, command line JMX client.
>> Such a tool would be incredibly useful, Java applications and application servers,
and JMX are not going anywhere, and each one has its own management tool. Jmxsh and Jmanage
fall short, and are not fast and easy to use. This tool, I think became a bit convoluted in
the community process, with people checking in whatever they felt should go into it. I still
believe this tool fits a crucial need, as was agreed upon when I presented this utility to
LAJUG. Lack of talent certainly isn't the problem here. I think that someone just has to take
the lead and get brave about rejecting commits and leading the direction. I'm fine with that,
as long as someone is willing to do the development work. I'm also ok with retiring the project,
if that's what the community wants and votes on, but I think that there will still be a void
in the Java app world that will go unfulfilled which this utility was supposed to serve.
>> With that perspective expressed, what are the communities sentiments?
>> Sincerely,
>> msacks
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Alessandro Novarini"<>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 5:05am
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for Jan 2012 ([ppmc])
>> Hi all,
>> As I stated, I spoke basically for myself and the report may not
>> reflect the general feeling of the current team.
>> I wasn't blaming anyone, that has to be clear, because otherwise I'll
>> be the first one to be blamed for having been away for such a long
>> time.
>> I completely understand everybody has its own
>> life/job/interest/whatever, my regret is that we still haven't reached
>> a critical mass for keeping the project going even if some of the
>> developer stop working on the project.
>> Unfortunately, I don't have a solution for that; as you said, some
>> projects are interesting enough to attract more people, some other
>> projects are not.
>> This has nothing to do with the technical aspect of the project nor
>> with the quality of the code; when I remarked that it was for pointing
>> out that when Matthew started the project he was - i guess - the only
>> one with a clear idea of how the project would progress.
>> Now I think the only one left is Pid, but for my understanding he's
>> quite busy at the moment, I really do hope he will have some time in
>> the nearly future to hop on again, I enjoyed the time we all worked
>> together.
>> About the meritocracy thing: yes, I agree again with you here
>> everybody as a team could be the PO, what I think is that some of the
>> 'power' you get from acquired merit won't last a lifetime, but it
>> could also be lost. To me that's something everybody should aim to
>> keep what he gained, and there is no shame in changing their mind
>> during the whole process. That's why I raised the point about how many
>> people are still interested in Kitty.
>> I honestly have no idea what the features for a project like Kitty
>> should be added or improved, so I'm sorry, but I'm simply not fitted
>> for that role.
>> I would really read from other people their thoughts about the
>> project, I hope everybody will find some spare time to join the
>> discussion.
>> Thanks and have a good day
>> Ale
>> On 12 January 2012 02:19, Kevan Miller<>  wrote:
>>> On Jan 11, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Alessandro Novarini wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I've just finished writing the report on the wiki page.
>>>> Sorry if I might seem rude or not polite, I only tried to base the report
on facts relevant to me, as we didn't discuss together about the actual status of the project.
>>>> I trust if anybody had something to complain, he could freely update the
report with the due corrections.
>>> Hi Ale,
>>> Thanks for the report. I don't have many quibbles with what you've written.
>>> I do have a few general comments:
>>> Communities ebb and flow. Sometimes communities go through slow periods. This
is not necessarily a problem.
>>> Sometimes Incubating projects retire. Not all projects work out. Not all projects
attract a critical mass for an effective community. This is not a failure -- and in no way
necessarily reflects on the technical aspects of the code. Nor does it reflect on the people
who contribute to the community.
>>> That said, if people care about the project. They can keep it going, contribute,
and eventually graduate from Incubator. I have no doubt that can easily happen for Kitty…
People make successful projects and communities. They don't just happen...
>>> And a specific comment:
>>> Re: "The lack of a "Product Owner"" -- the "community" is the "product owner".
Anyone (or group of people) can assume this role. Apache is a meritocracy. If someone has
ideas on where the project should go, wants to define/prioritize tasks, and provide the community
with what features need to be implemented -- they can do so. Anyone can do this -- current
committers or someone completely new to the project can initiate this. So, if someone is interested
in the project, don't just wait for someone to tell you what to do -- *do*. Or, better yet,
do *and* tell other people what to do… ;-)
>>> --kevan
> -- 
> Alessandro Novarini

View raw message