couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <>
Subject Re: Transactional _bulk_docs
Date Fri, 06 Feb 2009 18:27:17 GMT
Thanks Ted, for the calm words.

On 6 Feb 2009, at 19:20, Ted Leung wrote:

> On Feb 6, 2009, at 8:04 AM, Damien Katz wrote:
>>> This may hint at one of my biggest concerns here, the  
>>> balkanization of the PMC from the rest of the community.  I don't  
>>> think I've ever seen a project where the dividing line between the  
>>> PMC and the rest of the community was so often and brightly drawn.
>> Please tell me more about this brightly drawn line. We should get  
>> rid of it.
> I don't know if this is what Geir means, but there is a lot of use  
> of the letters PMC in messages on the list.   Much more than usual,  
> in my experience.    That may sound like a small thing, but that  
> kind of small thing, repeated over time,  can lead to a highly  
> stratified community, which is undesirable.

As for my part, I was simply adapting ASF terminology and wrote PMC  
where I meant "the individual contributers, Chris, Chris, Damien, Noah  
and Jan". In no way I was trying to draw a line or fence anybody out.  
Sorry, if things came across that way. I didn't know "the PMC" is a  
"red flag" when talking community :)


>>> There's a comment later in this thread where Chris describes his  
>>> role as ... well, for lack of better words, your handler, to  
>>> shield you from the community.  Things like that feed my  
>>> perception.  More on that later.
>>> I have an idea :
>>> 1) Stop coding.
>> No. The changes I am making need to be made regardless. They  
>> encompass much more than just the transaction change.
> Is there a way to commit some of the unrelated changes over time?    
> I find that it's easier to understand a series of  small patches as  
> opposed to large ones.
>> Then why are you being so combative and insulting to our team?
> Damien, I am sorry that this has ended up at such a contentious place.
>> The only complaint is that I didn't run some stuff over the mailing  
>> list before writing code.
> I think that part of why we are having contention is wrapped up in  
> the sentence above.   When I read this sentence, I feel that you are  
> being dismissive of the use of mailing lists.   When I originally  
> chimed in on this thread it was in response to your statement that  
> the decision was made in IRC:
> On Feb 4, 2009, at 11:11 PM, Damien Katz wrote:
>> Ideally yes, but real time communication with everyone together is  
>> damn useful.
>> -Damien
>> On Feb 5, 2009, at 2:07 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
>>> Uh, project decisions are supposed to be made in the public  
>>> mailing lists...
>>> Ted
>>> On Feb 4, 2009, at 6:51 PM, Damien Katz wrote:
>>>> This decision was discussed and made on IRC.
>>>> -Damien
> Honestly, I felt that your response was dismissive of my concern.    
> The ASF has minimal requirements of projects but one of the key  
> requirements is that decisions be made on the public mailing lists,  
> in a way that invites participate of an ever growing community.    
> There is probably no quicker way for a project to invite scrutiny  
> than to have something seem not quite right in this area.   Time and  
> again problems in this area have proved to lead to problems with a  
> project.    I was, and am, responding to something that experience  
> tells me is a warning sign.   I am not trying to disparage you or  
> the project by doing this.    The reason I am writing this now is  
> that I want to be sure that I am conveying how important this issue  
> is, not only to, but to the the foundation as a whole.
>> I haven't checked in anything yet, and I won't until we've had more  
>> discussion, review and testing. This problem is a non-issue,
> I look forward to seeing the code, and the ensuing discussion.
> Ted

View raw message