Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Special Board Report for May 2011
From: Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <00bb01cc10ec$057b8890$107299b0$@thetaphi.de>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 21:38:28 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BDBFFE60-8A40-47EE-9C8C-90A98B3E65B8@apache.org>
References: <B8B6F06F-92EE-4C74-B233-7E9CAC23E628@apache.org>
 <BANLkTi=crYNpFdfBWEVMdA59j6EmLNpn=g@mail.gmail.com>
 <567B7495-87D2-4A4E-B528-BE1B1EBA85A0@apache.org>
 <059CA21D-8E66-4E3B-B4C8-18B580F81EC4@apache.org>
 <BANLkTikpDx0MhEyD7re3X6gR++Wg5G_J4g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110507075254.GA24376@gmail.com>
 <BANLkTinEJgV270kTc7qZaOaH4p4Zi+Os9A@mail.gmail.com>
 <BANLkTimEoidX6X80w+Mk-=9p+GN7j4DZeA@mail.gmail.com>
 <78630746-11B7-4E18-861E-15E575F06827@apache.org>
 <6144AE96-E856-4A0E-A337-A7948CFFF690@mitre.org>
 <5427CD3F-6024-4501-8870-7B452B5227DD@apache.org>
 <00bb01cc10ec$057b8890$107299b0$@thetaphi.de>
To: general@lucene.apache.org


On May 12, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote:

>>> I think the current state of logging only #lucene-dev is good.
>>=20
>> Yeah, except no one is on it other than a few people even though many =
of
>> them (committers that is) are on #lucene
>=20
> I haven't seen any technical discussions anymore on #lucene. I was
> discussing with simon and mike on #lucene-dev the past days and had =
some
> work going on for the IndexUpgrader tool and MergePolicies. The =
discussions
> were even linked on JIRA issues.
>=20
>>> I go to #lucene-dev now. I think only IRC channel(s) that are
> Lucene/Solr
>> internal development in nature need to be logged -- and that's just
> #lucene-
>> dev. So just because you have observed many developers are on #lucene
>> instead of #lucene-dev doesn't indicate a problem, so long as no =
design
>> decisions for Lucene/Solr take place on #lucene or #solr.  #lucene =
and
> #solr is
>> where users get to ask questions, much like how it is on the user =
mailing
> lists.
>> So *if* (I don't know if it happens) internal Lucene / Solr design
> decisions are
>> taking place on #lucene or #solr then obviously that must stop. I'd =
rather
>> these channels not get logged so that we can have an expectation of a
> single
>> place for these discussions on IRC and have that place be clear of =
user
>> support questions.
>>>=20
>>> RE refactoring / modularization, it's good to finally see a sense of
>> agreement on how to move forward.
>=20
> Yeah that ok, I have nothing to add to that (and don't want anymore, =
it's a
> soap opera).
>=20
>>>> 3. Put in the automated patch checking system that Hadoop uses.
>> Volunteers?  Perhaps we can knock this out at Lucene Revolution?
>=20
> Who logs the stuff there? In my opinion, a meeting on Lucene-Rev is =
also
> "private" - or is this different somehow? What's difference between a
> private talk between two or three people in a bar at Lucene Revolution
> without somebody writing down a log? A log can also be written if =
somebody
> else talks with me in a private Skype chat!
>=20

Point taken.  For this particular thing at Revolution, I was just saying =
we could get the Patch checker implemented while in person and it would =
be logged b/c we write up how it works (which Nigel Daley has already on =
Builds and which I think I forwarded)

At any rate, you are right.  We should just make sure we log things as =
appropriate.  People have discussions all the time.  The gist of the =
discussions and any proposals should be logged.  Then it needs some time =
to be noticed before it is officially acted on, I guess.  In other =
words, if two people get together on IRC and make a decision then it =
should be logged and they can say something like "I plan to commit this =
in a day or two" instead of simply committing it right then and there.  =
Of course, for small stuff, use your judgment.  I think we all get it, =
at this point, so I will stop beating the dead horse.

-Grant