Mailing-List: contact users-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" <users@tomcat.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bilal.soylu@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F2AF442.2060208@apache.org>
References: 
 <A3FB5D9FD28C50429DF7692DC31054E60482A636@DC1INTADCW8201.yieldbroker.com>
	<4F2A5E19.6010400@ice-sa.com>
	<4F2A6035.4070807@apache.org>
	<CAPVz57Q0zU0jcqjbZntNgfiv+wCWK_J0g6Hv2ZrJmz9nLdeDkQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<-8317048194273524850@unknownmsgid>
	<CAPVz57TFQqPw+hNhn=bKfqz2V2h6rMubUXW+igqDBryTkSCy1g@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F2AF442.2060208@apache.org>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 14:59:31 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAPVz57SZzCG=OFssROEdqgfJciVFN9+htW+CjbSN2jt+UcwJXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [OT] problems with performance with IIS 7.5 and Tomcat Connector
From: Bilal S <bilal.soylu@gmail.com>
To: Tomcat Users List <users@tomcat.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6dab073f8467404b83cfb82

--0016e6dab073f8467404b83cfb82
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Mark Thomas <markt@apache.org> wrote:

> On 02/02/2012 20:19, Bilal S wrote:
> > I am willing to learn but finding the Apache related processes
> > singularly difficult to deal with. We are working with mailing list,
> > in the age of websites and social media.
>
> Correct. This is deliberate. Mailing lists are the lowest common
> denominator and allow the widest possible participation. Not everyone
> has an always on internet connection with high bandwidth.


=E8 Thanks for clarifying. Is the goal to design for the lowest common
dominator? This would mean that if 99% of  the user base had access to
better tools and 1% did not you would design for the 1%?

If so, this would be a disservice to the user community, wouldn=92t it?

There are more improved design principles that have found use on the web
for the last decade and have proven to serve their user base better. For
example, either graceful degradation or progressive enhancement would be
able to help the whole population without sacrifice. Why not adopt one at
the ASF?


> For those
> folks with bandwidth to spare that prefer a forum interface, there are
> third parties that provide it. I love that the tools we use at the ASF
> work just as well when I (or anyone else) is at the end of a very slow
> mobile data connection in the middle of almost nowhere even though
> trying to view a web page from the same place is pretty much impossible
> these days.
>

=E8

Also not sure that the issue of better and easier to use tools and
communication is a bandwidth problem alone, and thus, concluding that
people with low bandwidth would prefer email as lone mechanism of
communication does not follow automatically. There are rich experiences
possible for people with low bandwidth connections. Apps running in
browsers making use of partial connections, local storage and enhanced
programmability have blown this boundary a while ago. Similarly, on the
mobile side, there are smart apps aware of connectivity. There are many
examples, but I would like to point at Google for example implementations.
A quick tour of google mobile apps and google groups online shows well
designed interaction for any bandwidth. Why can=92t this be a goal at ASF?


>
> > There is no easy to find contact form anywhere on the Apache
> > websites.
>
> Also correct. The primary form of communication within Apache
> communities are the mailing lists and these should be obviously linked
> from each project's home page. In Tomcat's case, you'll find the forum
> based interfaces linked from the same place.
>
> =E8
Thanks for clarifying. Thus, I am challenging ASF to be more open and do
better than mailing list. Why would running users to a gauntlet to be able
to talk someone be considered effective or desirable for an organization
promoting openness? It may reduce email volumes but wouldn't hide the true
issues?


> Yet, there seems to be a lot emotions floating around in this list.
>
> With a high a volume mailing list such as this, there is an expectation
> that folks follow [1] and a distinct lack of patience for folks that
> continue to ignore that excellent advice after they have been pointed
> towards it.
>

=E8

I understand the nature of volunteer work. I appreciate the hard work and
dedication of all. The word =93Excellent=94 does throw me for a loop though=
 as
I can not find objective measurements that would back this up.

For example, are we basing excellence on resolution rate? On time to
resolution, on professionalism of interaction? Number of steps? What
baselines have been established against similar organizations (e.g. Jboss,
etc.) and support groups; how has this group done better or worse?  I think
it would be a great project for ASF to establish goals and measure them in
contrast to others in this area, especially given the volunteer nature. In
my opinion, it is hallmark of maturity to be able to this type of
assessment.


Though there is not doubt that some users will =93ignore=94 advice by very
smart contributors, it does not mean they deserve less respect in the way
that they are being treated or do not deserve to ask questions. No volume
 (I think this group averages about a dozen emails per day over a year) of
request justifies discourteous treatment by anyone to anyone else.


As you can tell I have a disagreement on this statement and issue alone.
Even in a very positive light, I am reading little regard for users. Is
this true? In my opinion, organizations that promote Free and Open
Software, should be easily accessible, easy to communicate with, and make
their mission to educate others (even the ones that =93ignore advice=94) ab=
out
the principles, the products and services. It should not be a punishment to
post on list, and you should not be bullied out of them. Maybe I am out of
line or just an idealist, but that would be highly cool and I know it is
possible and ASF could do it. As an example check out Jboss.org
 communities.


>
> > This in  a way is good. It speaks of passion and dedication. I would
> > ask that this passion is directed toward assistance and innovation.
> > This probably will go farther than anything else.
> >
> > Feel free to email me directly if you want to chat.
>
> Off-list communication is discouraged. This is a single community that
> communicates through the project mailing lists. This is particularly
> important on the dev list. A key element of the "Apache Way" is:
> "If it didn't happen on the list, it didn't happen".
>
> Mark
>
>
=E8
This is another point of disagreement. Posting on list is not automatically
the solution to all issues.  I understand that this list is being used as
=93system of record=94. In this particular case, I perceived that a user ha=
d an
issue with me personally rather than the list. The common guideline for
conflict resolution dictates that a resolution should be found between the
two parties in conflict, so I volunteered to reach out. Conflict resolution
in groups is less effective. But since you asked I am posting back here.

Thanks again,
Bilal

--0016e6dab073f8467404b83cfb82--