commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <>
Subject Re: [ALL] The Commons Math issue (Was: [DRAFT] Board report)
Date Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:56:09 GMT
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Gilles <>

> Hello.
> Gary,
> Thank you for mentioning the CM issue.
> But...
> [...]
>> ## Health report:
>>  [...]
>>  - We are still experiencing some growing pains toward Commons Math 4.
>> There
>>    is a backlog of issues in JIRA (not unlike other components) but no
>> clear
>>    concensus in the community. Do-ocracy is likely to prevail.
> ... This being an Apache community, is everyone at ease with using
> "likely" in the above sentence?
>    There is a
>>    proposal on how to move the code base forward and having Math depend on
>>    Commons Numbers and Commons RNG, and then dropping the corresonding
>>    Math code. All of which can be seen on the developer's mailing list.
> Several board reports have mentioned the "growing pains" and lack of
> of consensus.
> At what point are they going to reflect that the problem must be dealt
> with?

If you are looking to involve the board, then you are asking for a
sledgehammer. I do not see any rules or guidelines being broken, or the
Apache Way being blocked. I do not see egregious behavior or disrespectful
communication. I see busy people doing what they want when the want in all
of Commons, respectfully and diligently.

> PMC members do not have time to contribute to all components, but is
> it fine that this obvious fact prevents further development of some
> components (including _parts_ of current CM) that could be maintained
> with much less manpower?  [IMHO, the development of "Commons RNG"
> somewhat proved that last point.]

For me, the PMC's main job is to vote on releases. PMC members do not have
to code or participate in the bits and bytes of all components. Sure, it
helps to know that some PMC members agree with one's direction, which
should facilitate pushing releases through. We all know the voting rules by
this point, the barrier to release is not very high IMO.

Commons is more open than any other Apache Project, anyone with commit
rights can commit to Commons. That's pretty open. Our job is to attract
like minded folks for the components we need help.

> Must do-ocracy prevail or not?  And, if not, why?  [Let the board
> answer if the PMC members won't.]

Yes doing the work gets you most of way there. Proposing a path forward and
engaging fellow developers gets you most of the way there. Hopefully PMC
members can offer some wisdom along the way and point out what they think
is best. No one is malicious here. But, we all have POVs of course ;-)

Discussions, building consensus, over time, is what I feel will get Math 4
out of the mud.

> My proposal concerning the future of the CM codebase has been on the
> table for almost a year, without anyone else working on the alternative
> that had been discussed (that is, keep working on CM "as-is"), as can
> be viewed from the lack of communication with users (cf. JIRA issues).
> Readers of the ML could infer that I tried to come closer to a
> "compromise", by suggesting a release of CM 4.0 (thus mitigating my
> disappointment that a large part of that code would still have no
> support from any of the "Commons" active developers).
> However, the compromise only makes sense if those on the other side
> of argument will participate in its implementation.

I appreciate you efforts over time. Let's keep things moving. Hopefully
more folks will become engaged.


> Thanks for your attention,
> Gilles
>> [...]
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

E-Mail: |
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition

JUnit in Action, Second Edition

Spring Batch in Action

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message