RE: JAMES v2.4 Road Map (Status Update) Switched to PMC

[Steve Brewin <sb...@synsys.com>]

Hi,

I stumbled across this unsent message in my drafts. I had decided not to
send it, but in the light of current server-dev discussions I've changed my
mind (obviously). The original context was "Version numbers (Was: LONG JAMES
v2.4 Road Map)". I'm sending this to the PMC as I don't think it good to air
these issues publicly on server-dev and its for the PMC to resolve.

---

</snipped>

'cos I don't want anyone to feel I'm aiming at them in person. I think we
all should review how we are discussing and proceeding. Compared to other
ASF lists we don't convey a good impression (IMHO).

Like good wine, discussions need time to breathe.

Instead of rapidly firing point and counterpoint its sometimes better to
wait for everyone to air their views before responding. Diving straight in
often leads to more confusion than illumination.

While the intent is to arrive at a conclusion, often the reverse happens.
Discussions are unneccesarily extended leaving less time to get the real
work done.

Once a position has been stated, taking time to view, absorb and understand
all of the different points of view and then assembling a coherent response
offering a positive way forward before adding to the discussion is often the
best way to go.

While I understand the need to maintain momentum, constantly putting issues
to a time constrained vote disenfranchises the time constrained. It also
leaves me, and perhaps others, feeling forced into making micro-choices
which ignore macro-issues, edging us along a roadmap which, ironically, I
have never voted on. There is the illusion of democracy, but often I feel
like a vegetarian being asked how I would like my beef steak cooked.

-- Steve

Not dead, just not voting :)

---

James is a community. Some are more active than others right now. Some have
deeper and longer experience. Some have been elected by their peers to be
members of the PMC. This confers both greater powers and greater
responsibility. We should use the former wisely and always remember the
latter. Those of us with longer experience know that the kind of flame wars
we are starting to see develop amongst PMC members here most often have
unhappy outcomes. Let's not go there.

Can we all take a step back and find a way through this? A moderator
perhaps?

Cheers

-- Steve









---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

Re: JAMES v2.4 Road Map (Status Update) Switched to PMC

[Bernd Fondermann <be...@googlemail.com>]

Thanks for sending this, Steve, really! I very heartfully agree with you.

This is a mail for printing out and double-checking everytime before
hitting the "send" button.

Thanks again!

  Bernd

On 10/25/06, Steve Brewin <sb...@synsys.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I stumbled across this unsent message in my drafts. I had decided not to
> send it, but in the light of current server-dev discussions I've changed my
> mind (obviously). The original context was "Version numbers (Was: LONG JAMES
> v2.4 Road Map)". I'm sending this to the PMC as I don't think it good to air
> these issues publicly on server-dev and its for the PMC to resolve.
>
> ---
>
> </snipped>
>
> 'cos I don't want anyone to feel I'm aiming at them in person. I think we
> all should review how we are discussing and proceeding. Compared to other
> ASF lists we don't convey a good impression (IMHO).
>
> Like good wine, discussions need time to breathe.
>
> Instead of rapidly firing point and counterpoint its sometimes better to
> wait for everyone to air their views before responding. Diving straight in
> often leads to more confusion than illumination.
>
> While the intent is to arrive at a conclusion, often the reverse happens.
> Discussions are unneccesarily extended leaving less time to get the real
> work done.
>
> Once a position has been stated, taking time to view, absorb and understand
> all of the different points of view and then assembling a coherent response
> offering a positive way forward before adding to the discussion is often the
> best way to go.
>
> While I understand the need to maintain momentum, constantly putting issues
> to a time constrained vote disenfranchises the time constrained. It also
> leaves me, and perhaps others, feeling forced into making micro-choices
> which ignore macro-issues, edging us along a roadmap which, ironically, I
> have never voted on. There is the illusion of democracy, but often I feel
> like a vegetarian being asked how I would like my beef steak cooked.
>
> -- Steve
>
> Not dead, just not voting :)
>
> ---
>
> James is a community. Some are more active than others right now. Some have
> deeper and longer experience. Some have been elected by their peers to be
> members of the PMC. This confers both greater powers and greater
> responsibility. We should use the former wisely and always remember the
> latter. Those of us with longer experience know that the kind of flame wars
> we are starting to see develop amongst PMC members here most often have
> unhappy outcomes. Let's not go there.
>
> Can we all take a step back and find a way through this? A moderator
> perhaps?
>
> Cheers
>
> -- Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org