incubator-river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brouwer <mark.brou...@cheiron.org>
Subject Re: River and Backward Compatibility
Date Wed, 05 Sep 2007 09:37:13 GMT
Dan Creswell wrote:

> My question was deliberately very open - I'm interested in any and all
> thoughts, of course views on the specifics of the compatibility debate
> around AR1 are more useful at this time.
> 
> I've seen a lot of caveats so far relating to not being in production -
> would appreciate hearing from some of those that do have production
> deployments (I'll happily accept private email on this for those that
> wish to be stealthy).

Hi Dan, please don't take it as any offense but I'm rather uncomfortable
with "I'll happily accept private email on this for those that wish to
be stealthy".

I've been long uncomfortable with the fact that some stakeholders in the
Jini community wished to remain anonymous and speak through some proxy
(a story I've heard often in those private conversation I also had). It
ain't hard to get a temp email address if the stakes are high and one
wishes to remain anonymous.

This email may sound as an overreaction, but I like to make use of the
opportunity to express something I've always been able to bite my tongue
so for, but no longer.

The move of Jini to the Apache River project implies an increase in
transparency to me, that what concerns the codebase should be discussed
in the open and that those who express their opinion themselves will be
heard, those who stay silent IMHO not.

Of course I realize that some people may represent a larger part of the
Jini community, that is fine, and that those parts of the Jini community
will have its own means to influence their proxy. But in the end it is
that single persons who steps forwards with his/her opinion and with a
single vote.

How can we properly discuss with or find out about the details when
someone only speaks through a proxy who by definition (because of
being human) applies its own filtering due to "cognitive dissonance", I
realize not everybody is maybe subject to it to the extent I am, but
still ...

IMHO what we should advocate is to speak in the open, and to discourage
taking private email concerning these matters.
-- 
Mark


Mime
View raw message