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: Apache River Roadmap
Date Mon, 12 Feb 2007 07:31:22 GMT
Dan Creswell wrote:

>> Also I refuse to let my need for features I require be based on how the
>> outside world thinks of it. I can only hope it will be appreciated but
>> that is not my main motivation for contributing here.
> Can you clarify that statement please?  From at least one viewpoint,
> you've just said "I'm only interested in playing with my Jini and I
> don't care what anyone else thinks".

I think I said or at least I meant to say was that my requirements for
enhancements to the Jini technology are a function of my work with Jini
and that my need is not a function of how this is going to be perceived
by the larger outside world.

So if I want a change in PreferredClassLoader to solve a failure
scenario but it doesn't qualify as a high sex-appeal feature on the
changelist or won't make headlines then that doesn't matter to me, nor
do I think it should. The right to propose and discuss that change here
is important to me, regardless of whether it is going to make Jini more
relevant to the world in the eyes of most. The process here at the ASF
will ensure that people involved in the project will have their say
based on (technical) merit and as such their opinion really matters to
me, don't get that wrong. But I should not need to apply a 'relevance
filter' on any of my thoughts before bringing it to the list here. I can
live though with an answer "Not now, for it doesn't fit our roadmap, so
please do it in your own copy of the code.".

>>> The kinds of minutae (e.g. PreferredClassLoader changes) we've talked
>>> about thus far will not address any of these problems.  If River is not
>> I would appreciate it if you stop labeling these discussions as being
>> about minutiae. The last thing we need IMHO is people backing of
>> discussion about code because it might not fit someones definition of
>> relevance.
> I will not stop labelling it as such because I see no point in messing
> around with this stuff unless there's a bigger context driving it.  And
> for me at least that bigger context needs to be about a lot more than
> just "it fixes a bug" or "it makes the code nicer" or "it makes the code
> more perfect" etc.

I think in a collaborative project there is one thing that is very
important: "respectful, honest, technical-based interaction".

I have no problem with you saying "Maybe it is good idea to decide what
we are going to do in the bigger context here as that would help a lot
in going forward.", but your message to the participants on the list was
"The river-dev list is full of minutae - discussion of coding standards,
issues on nitty gritty bits of behaviour around locking or
preferred-lists or when we might get the code drop or testing or
checkins. But, I don't care about any of this stuff, why? Because it's

It is probably just me being overly sensitive to these kind or words,
but I have problems seeing this and other remarks in "Drowning in the
River" as paying respect to your fellow people here. They were certainly
honest ;-) and your intentions were good I presume, but to me it didn't
feel good.

> Maybe I do and maybe I'll get to talking about them one day but I'm much
> more interested in hearing the "community view", people like Mike or
> Sean for example and forming a roadmap from that.
> In absence of such feedback and if there's general interest from other
> committers I will consider putting them forward.  Otherwise, I will
> assume the project wants to focus on the kind of things you've put
> forward in which case I will execute on my ideas elsewhere.

Dan isn't this project a summation of what people want to do and where
they want to put their effort in? Maybe the things I want to focus on
are not the things you or any of the other committers want to focus on,
but that doesn't mean there is a problem or conflict by definition.

You make it sound that I've decided what the project should or should
not look like, I hope my postings should have made clear that I don't
exactly know where the border is, where it should be or which way we
should go. A lot of that will be determined by those who bring in ideas
and can back that up with time, therefore I find it strange that while
you have ideas we have to keep asking for it. By showing your ideas, we
can see whether we have a problem and if there appears to be a problem
we can try to solve it.

View raw message