You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org> on 2003/04/24 22:50:41 UTC
Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release
Some documentation errors for Fortress were caught, and CVS has
those fixed. The listing of the @avalon.*** attributes needs
to be done.
Also XMLUtil and Store needs some real docs. Any takers? Carsten?
Others?
There is also a question on whether these components should be
hosted here or not. To answer that question, I asked for some
input from various groups.
1) Most concerns of maintenance can be dealt with if Excalibur
and Sandbox are opened up to a wider Apache audience.
2) Cocooner's are resistant to another move and potential
package change (who can blame them?).
3) FOP has designs on using them.
4) Other developers mentioned that they are using them outside
of Cocoon.
5) Initial feedback from Jakarta Commons indicates we should
host Avalon specific stuff (i.e. requires Framework JAR)
here. Further clarification pending.
It looks as if the best option is to open up Excalibur/Sandbox
to allow Cocoon/FOP/JAMES to maintain the required components
here.
Are there any other issues that I am missing?
--
"You know the world is going crazy when the best
rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy,
The Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is
accusing the US of arrogance, and Germany doesn't want
to go to war. And the 3 most powerful men in America
are named 'Bush', 'Dick', and 'Colon' (sic)".
-----Chris Rock
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Wed, 30 Apr 2003 23:50, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > avalon-site
> > avalon-framework
> > excalibur-fortress
> > excalibur-lifecycle
> > excalibur-instrument(* ???)
> > excalibur-logger
> > excalibur-pool (but we deprecate this - and possibly merge into
> > following) excalibur-component (but we deprecate this)
> > excalibur-compatability (but we deprecate this)
> > and possibly avalon-logkit.
>
> I noticed that you removed some things that Fortress depends on, but
> kept fortress. For one, the SourceResolver.
I don't really care what the list consists of as long as it is something that
ALL developers will support and maintain.
> > We also move to maven as build system to stop the chances of code getting
> > broken due to poor process. We can use it to enforce certain quality
> > controls and release processes.
>
> I think this is a separate issue that we can address separately. I
> agree in principle, but I need to get an install that just works.
If you can point out the difficulties I can fix them for you. There are some
problems with certain plugins but they are work-aroundable.
> Perhaps there is a reason for more than one day without the issue being
> resolved?
But there is no reason for this to go on for months or even years. BTW our
website is STILL broken.
> The moral of the story is that removing all the current causes for
> conflict doesn't solve the problem.
Sure it does. It removes the causes of conflict and then you just have to work
to make sure new causes of conflict are not introduced which is a much easier
proposition.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
Non-Reciprocal Laws of Expectations:
Negative expectations yield negative results.
Positive expectations yield negative results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 19:37, Neeme Praks wrote:
>
>>Can we clean this mess? Just write down the things that are bothering
>>you and then we can address these issues.
>
>
> I just wrote a long email on all the problems in Avalon and it ended up
> several pages long. Basically the same points I have been complaining about
> for ages. Some of those problems are unlikely to go away. Rather than repeat
> it all maybe it is best to say what I think is best for Avalon.
>
> Basically we still have one man code bases, crapola code, and other stuff that
> is only going to cause conflict. I propose that almost all component
> development gets done elsewhere (though we can do link back) where it is more
> healthy environment. I would suggest jakarta-commons in most cases if
> collaboration is the goal of components. I would propose that the only
> solution is to get back to a single code base that everyone accepts and will
> work on. So we burn away all other code in Avalon so that there is just the
> following;
Keep in mind that all of these things have to be done in accordance with
the community dynamic. We are a team, and we need to work as one--I
have some ideas for moving forward, but we also need to resolve some
other issues in the short term first.
Let the team decide what they want to keep, and if they decide to keep
it, they decide to maintain it.
>
> avalon-site
> avalon-framework
> excalibur-fortress
> excalibur-lifecycle
> excalibur-instrument(* ???)
> excalibur-logger
> excalibur-pool (but we deprecate this - and possibly merge into following)
> excalibur-component (but we deprecate this)
> excalibur-compatability (but we deprecate this)
> and possibly avalon-logkit.
I noticed that you removed some things that Fortress depends on, but
kept fortress. For one, the SourceResolver.
This code is now maintained by us, and we use it, so we have a vested
interest in it.
> We also move to maven as build system to stop the chances of code getting
> broken due to poor process. We can use it to enforce certain quality controls
> and release processes.
I think this is a separate issue that we can address separately. I
agree in principle, but I need to get an install that just works.
> We also start requiring that people accept responsibility for their actions.
> We can also implement some process that stops people chronically breaking
> code or our website as is currently the case. Maybe going as far as removing
> privs of those who wont shape up.
That responsibility goes both ways. Perhaps we should put a timer on
someone and if they don't fix it within 30 seconds of someone else
noticing the mistake we fire them. Oh, wait a minute, how is that other
person going to know when someone else notices the mistake?
Perhaps there is a reason for more than one day without the issue being
resolved? It pays to find out what is going on before we run around
with a loaded gun and arbitrarily removing commit privs. That is a very
serious action, and it should never be done lightly.
> The effects of this will be to vastly improve dynamics here as it removes all
> the codebases that have caused conflict and will establish Avalons focus on
> codebases that almost all of the active Avalon developers have worked or
> collaborated on. Otherwise I can't see any other way that we will ever return
> to a healthy project status.
There was this guy who felt guilty that his temper always flared up. He
decided that it was time to do something about it. He figured that if
he removed all the things that caused him to be angry for a while that
he could conquer that anger. He took a job as a forrest ranger in the
Yosemite, and for a period of an entire year he was not angry once. Of
course he never had any contact with other people in that period either.
After the year was up, someone drove up to give him his provisions for
the next year. The guy driving the truck said something in a joking
manner, but it was taken the wrong way. Our angry person went off,
yelling with all the anger he had before.
The moral of the story is that removing all the current causes for
conflict doesn't solve the problem.
You have to deal with it, and work it out. Provide some give and take.
Use the art of compromise to find a happy medium.
> In time if this is successful and people start collaborating again then we can
> establish an Avalon-Commons (though personally I think it would be far better
> to still do it in Jakarta-Commons).
We must be reading two different lists, because I am not seeing what you
are seeing. Truth be told, you are the only one pushing for Avalon
components over on Jakarta Commons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Jakob Praher <jp...@yahoo.de>.
hi guys,
as a kind of outsider, I want to say something on this topic:
I personally believe in avalon, I today worked through the sandbox and
saw really great stuff, and I it hurts me, when I see threads like this
going on.
Surely for a healthy community is important that if someone feels
personally attacked, to not swallow it, but emotional discussions tend
to escalate very easily ...
for a person not involved, something like that is always easy to say,
but I think Steve and Peter should set aside the emotions, and look into
the future again.
just my opinion on this topic.
and don't forget: its just about the fun of hacking anyways ;-)
bye and have a nice holiday, if your country celebrates may day
(here in Austria this is really a big holiday)
-- Jakob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics (offlist)
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Jakob Praher wrote:
>sorry for posting twice - somehow my provider does not like me today ;-)
>
Jakob:
I have to say that I really sorry for the discomfort that this has
raised. Rest assured that (a) I am receiving an incredible amount of
off list flack, (b) the PMC may actually do something to address the
problem, and (c) it has to happen sooner rather than later. In the
meantime, I hope you enjoy the treasures in sandbox!
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Jakob Praher <jp...@yahoo.de>.
sorry for posting twice - somehow my provider does not like me today ;-)
-- Jakob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Jakob Praher <jp...@yahoo.de>.
hi guys,
as a kind of outsider, I want to say something on this topic:
I personally believe in avalon, I today worked through the sandbox and
saw really great stuff, and I am very sad, when I see threads like this
going on.
Surely for a healthy community is important that if someone feels
personally attacked, to not swallow it, but emotional discussions tend
to escalate very easily ...
for a person not involved, something like that is always easy to say,
but I think we should set aside the emotions, and look into the future
again.
just my opinion on this topic.
and don't forget: its just about the fun of hacking anyways ;-)
bye and have a nice holiday, if your country celebrates may day
(here in Austria this is really a big holiday)
-- Jakob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Neeme Praks <ne...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
>> You asked how I could possibly consider my own comments as
>> constructive. I responded to your question with a detailed summary
>> that addresses what I consider to be the real underlying issues. I
>> agree that one could consider my conclusion as "heavy". I think you
>> must also consider this conclusion in the light of the sustained
>> damage that Peter is doing to Avalon. Please take into consideration
>> that the continuation of this damage is not an acceptable scenario.
>> I have made my position clear, I think we should work with Peter to
>> facilitate a separation and an end to damage.
>
>
> How *constructive* was it? What was the net result? Is there more
> harmony on the list now that you have said it? I think not.
I would say that maybe there is not more "harmony", but definetly it was
good to get all the (supressed) emotions out... And it was much more
argumented than any of Peter's emails on the same topic. If we could get
also Peter's point of view now, then we could actually have a dialogue
and sort this out.
Rgds,
Neeme
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>
>>>>
>>>> I quote:
>>>>
>>>> "I can.
>>>> Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon."
>>>
>>> Lets place in context. Peter raised an assertion that his vision of
>>> the future of Avalon was a functional necessity with respect to the
>>> health of this community. Let me remind you on the conclusion he
>>> postulated:
>>
>>
>>
>> <snip type="justification"/>
>>
>> The bottom line is this: that language and attitude will not be
>> tolerated.
>
>
>
> What language are you referring to? What is this attitude that offends?
> I am simply expressing an opinion - an opinion that you have chosen to
> label as justification. That's a shame because I happen to think that I
> opinions I've put forward are opinions that you consider with perhaps a
> little more than 4 mins.
An old proverb states that there is none so blind as those that _will_
not see. Language and attitude: "Dismiss XYZ from PDQ". Refusal to
work with a committer of the same project is not good.
Every time I state something that my five year old daughter can clearly
understand you come from left field with some lengthy
argument/justification.
Did I read all of your comments--no. They had nothing to do with what
I put forth on the list.
>
>> Either learn to respect your peers or leave.
>
>
>
> I do respect my peers.
> I do not consider Peter as a peer.
Let me make it clear for you. Peter is a committer on this project.
He is your peer.
> Should I leave now or should I make an attempt at getting to the bottom
> of the problem?
You are not getting at the bottom of the problem, you are stirring up
strife. You have a perception of the problem, which may or may not
be the case--however until you learn to present your perceptions in a
more positive light very few people will listen.
>> It is not my job to be a baby sitter, nor do I want to make it my job.
>
> Did I ask for a babysitter? No.
You are behaving in a way which is putting me closer to that need.
>> All the other stuff that you sited is #1 irrelavent to the point
>> raised, and #2 does not justify what you wrote.
>
> You asked how I could possibly consider my own comments as
> constructive. I responded to your question with a detailed summary that
> addresses what I consider to be the real underlying issues. I agree
> that one could consider my conclusion as "heavy". I think you must also
> consider this conclusion in the light of the sustained damage that Peter
> is doing to Avalon. Please take into consideration that the continuation
> of this damage is not an acceptable scenario. I have made my position
> clear, I think we should work with Peter to facilitate a separation and
> an end to damage.
How *constructive* was it? What was the net result? Is there more
harmony on the list now that you have said it? I think not.
--
"You know the world is going crazy when the best
rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy,
The Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is
accusing the US of arrogance, and Germany doesn't want
to go to war. And the 3 most powerful men in America
are named 'Bush', 'Dick', and 'Colon' (sic)".
-----Chris Rock
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Peter Royal wrote:
> stephen: PLEASE TRIM YOUR QUOTES!
Sorry!
> On Thursday, May 1, 2003, at 02:46 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>> I do not consider Peter as a peer.
>
>
> If this is an immutable position we have a problem.
It is not an immutable position. Steve has a rather open interface and
any methods exposed by that interface are available to everyone here.
Keep in mind that to avail one self of these methods, one must take the
prerequisite steps of establishing a classloader containing the
interface definition and related classes. One method that that is
additive and outside of my direct control is the function
Avalon.positiveEnagement(). Steve has registered a listener on this
class, and irrespective of any other action, continued invocation of the
positiveEngagement function has a direct impact on my personal state
machine.
For additional information about the related API and functionality
available, please feel free to post a follow-up and I'll try to put
together the complete picture including expected parameters and
exception conditions.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Peter Royal <pr...@apache.org>.
stephen: PLEASE TRIM YOUR QUOTES!
On Thursday, May 1, 2003, at 02:46 PM, Stephen McConnell wrote:
> I do not consider Peter as a peer.
If this is an immutable position we have a problem.
-pete
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Berin Loritsch wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
>>>>>> respect for other team members!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's ignore that particular comment that you noted, as a moment
>>>>> of poorly
>>>>> chosen display of temper.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To the contrary - my brief but pointed reply to Pete's message was
>>>> calmly worded with a deliberate and calculated objective. To (a)
>>>> negate the credibility of his own message in the eyes of future
>>>> Google navigators (after all, there were more a couple of rather
>>>> disparaging comments that needed to be negated), and (b) express a
>>>> conclusion based on a lot of thinking about the background issues,
>>>> and taking into account the best interests of Peter and this
>>>> community.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I must admit Steve, that is a real perverse interpretation of what
>>> you wrote in that mail.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I was not interpriting what I wrote - I was replying to Noel's
>> assertion that my post was made in anger. I wanted to correct that
>> assumption and make it clear that if anything, I should be accused of
>> being deliberate and calculated.
>>
>>>
>>> I quote:
>>>
>>> "I can.
>>> Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Lets place in context. Peter raised an assertion that his vision of
>> the future of Avalon was a functional necessity with respect to the
>> health of this community. Let me remind you on the conclusion he
>> postulated:
>
>
> <snip type="justification"/>
>
> The bottom line is this: that language and attitude will not be
> tolerated.
What language are you referring to? What is this attitude that offends?
I am simply expressing an opinion - an opinion that you have chosen to
label as justification. That's a shame because I happen to think that I
opinions I've put forward are opinions that you consider with perhaps a
little more than 4 mins.
> Either learn to respect your peers or leave.
I do respect my peers.
I do not consider Peter as a peer.
Should I leave now or should I make an attempt at getting to the bottom
of the problem?
> It is not my job to be a baby sitter, nor do I want to make it my job.
Did I ask for a babysitter? No.
I expressed an opinion - a bunch of observation, some conclusions, some
comments and suggestions. If you have an opinion on any of those points
I will be more that happy to discuss those with you. Let's leave
babysitting out of this for the moment.
> All the other stuff that you sited is #1 irrelavent to the point
> raised, and #2 does not justify what you wrote.
You asked how I could possibly consider my own comments as
constructive. I responded to your question with a detailed summary that
addresses what I consider to be the real underlying issues. I agree
that one could consider my conclusion as "heavy". I think you must also
consider this conclusion in the light of the sustained damage that Peter
is doing to Avalon. Please take into consideration that the continuation
of this damage is not an acceptable scenario. I have made my position
clear, I think we should work with Peter to facilitate a separation and
an end to damage.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>
> Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>>
>>>>> WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
>>>>> respect for other team members!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let's ignore that particular comment that you noted, as a moment of
>>>> poorly
>>>> chosen display of temper.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To the contrary - my brief but pointed reply to Pete's message was
>>> calmly worded with a deliberate and calculated objective. To (a)
>>> negate the credibility of his own message in the eyes of future
>>> Google navigators (after all, there were more a couple of rather
>>> disparaging comments that needed to be negated), and (b) express a
>>> conclusion based on a lot of thinking about the background issues,
>>> and taking into account the best interests of Peter and this community.
>>
>>
>>
>> I must admit Steve, that is a real perverse interpretation of what
>> you wrote in that mail.
>
>
>
> I was not interpriting what I wrote - I was replying to Noel's assertion
> that my post was made in anger. I wanted to correct that assumption and
> make it clear that if anything, I should be accused of being deliberate
> and calculated.
>
>>
>> I quote:
>>
>> "I can.
>> Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon."
>
>
>
> Lets place in context. Peter raised an assertion that his vision of the
> future of Avalon was a functional necessity with respect to the health
> of this community. Let me remind you on the conclusion he postulated:
<snip type="justification"/>
The bottom line is this: that language and attitude will not be
tolerated. Either learn to respect your peers or leave. It is not
my job to be a baby sitter, nor do I want to make it my job.
All the other stuff that you sited is #1 irrelavent to the point
raised, and #2 does not justify what you wrote.
--
"You know the world is going crazy when the best
rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy,
The Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is
accusing the US of arrogance, and Germany doesn't want
to go to war. And the 3 most powerful men in America
are named 'Bush', 'Dick', and 'Colon' (sic)".
-----Chris Rock
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>
>>>> WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
>>>> respect for other team members!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's ignore that particular comment that you noted, as a moment of
>>> poorly
>>> chosen display of temper.
>>
>>
>>
>> To the contrary - my brief but pointed reply to Pete's message was
>> calmly worded with a deliberate and calculated objective. To (a)
>> negate the credibility of his own message in the eyes of future
>> Google navigators (after all, there were more a couple of rather
>> disparaging comments that needed to be negated), and (b) express a
>> conclusion based on a lot of thinking about the background issues,
>> and taking into account the best interests of Peter and this community.
>
>
> I must admit Steve, that is a real perverse interpretation of what
> you wrote in that mail.
I was not interpriting what I wrote - I was replying to Noel's assertion
that my post was made in anger. I wanted to correct that assumption and
make it clear that if anything, I should be accused of being deliberate
and calculated.
>
> I quote:
>
> "I can.
> Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon."
Lets place in context. Peter raised an assertion that his vision of the
future of Avalon was a functional necessity with respect to the health
of this community. Let me remind you on the conclusion he postulated:
"I can't see any other way that we will ever return
to a healthy project status."
I responded with my conclusion of an alternative solution. After all,
Peter has clearly stated that he "can't see any other way". Given that I
can see another way, I felt that it was appropriate to express to Peter
that in fact another way existed. Rather than leave Pete dangling with a
sense of suspense, I thought it would be equally appropriate that I
express what I consider to be a viable alternative. Yes, my conclusion
has caused a few ripples, but nothing ground braking, certainly nothing
that Pete cannot respond to.
> How on earth can that be construed in any way, shape, or form as
> constructive?
Let's consider some of the questions from Neeme:
Neeme Praks wrote:
> On a more serious note, I have to admit, I've also noticed that most
> of Peter's recent emails have been a bit depressive, cynical and
> negative (I hope that I'm not misusing the terms here).
One has ask the question - what is driving this depression, this
cynicism, this negativity? If you look into this I think you will
discover a growing dislocation between the community and Peter. I also
happen to think that this is something equivalent to a growing pain.
Neeme puts forward a speculation:
> I suspect that it has much to do with his recent "incident" with the
> board). I sincerely believe that he will change his attitude to a more
> positive one, given some time and some support from this community.
It may be possibly that this attitude is related to the board incident,
but I doubt it. I would argue that this has much more to do with
different and conflicting ideas about communities and open source
processes. My impression is that Peter's ideas on the purpose and
functioning of a community and his idea of his role in a community are
at odds with the realities of healthy community development and growth
here at Avalon. This anamology dates back well before the board
intervention. In fact my conclusion is that this is nothing more than a
reflection of the maturing of the Avalon community.
I'm coming from an assumption that Pete isn't about to change his
attitude. I'm even not sure that I would like it to change. If you look
into the way Pete works - the chemistry of Pete and a community - he is
very focussed and very much in command. This is excellent when building
something new - the community is backing him and supporting the
champion. The problem is that Avalon has evolved beyond that model. It
evolved beyond that back last year. More recently the migration to a PMC
that reinforces community-based decisions, priorities, and development
direction, further conslidate that position and in this instance,
(unfortunately) isolate the role of the champion. Keep in mind that Pete
was instrumental in the establishment of Avalon (along with yourself)
and because of that has has received an enourmouse degree of latitude.
Unfortunately something has to change. Is is Peter or is it Avalon. If I
follow Peter's roadmap we are plotting the destruction of this community
- and honestly - that something I'm not too keen on seeing.
So instead of trying to change Peter, I figure it is better to focus on
establishing the context/chemistry/environment within which Peter can do
what he does best.
Neeme raises a question:
> Stephen, what exactly is your issue with Peter? Anything technical?
> Personality clash?
Lets' do a little dissection of the PD assertions and hopefully you both
you and Neeme
get a better idea of what my concerns are.
Peter wrote:
>Basically we still have one man code bases,
If we look at real issue - it's divergent streams of development. In my
opinion these exist primarily as a result of his unfortunate but
sustained opposition to the needs and requirements of other developers
here at Avalon. I doubt if the real issue here is "one-man" code bases -
instead I would suggest the issue is the principals of community
ownership, community decision making, and community development. By
attacking the "one-man" scenario one could conclude that he is attacking
the potential for exploration and development that push well beyond
those areas that he is closely aligned. Clearly these activities are
interpreted as a threat. However, I would argue that this analysis is
too simplistic. I would argue that Peter is fighting for a social model
that he understands and is capable of working within.
Indeed, those other iniative are not going to disappear. By building and
strengthening this community, those "one-man" bases will evolve and will
ultimately go well beyond any individual accomplishment. Unfortunately,
with the evolution of Avalon, we have a scenario in which Peter is an
obstacle to community development. It's not a case of throwing out
"one-man" code bases, instead, one must consider the removal of those
factors that inhibit the development of the community. In doing so we
have a responsibility to do this in a manner that does not discredit the
individual in question, and if possible, in a way that is in the longer
term interests of the community.
Peter continues:
>crapola code,
A rather negative statement without any supporting information.
Unfortunately there are people out there that may actually believe some
of the things that he states (i.e. hit a page, no context, make a
conclusion). This was one of the reasons for my short but pointed
replied to his original post.
Peter continues:
>and other stuff that is only going to cause conflict.
Avalon is not about any single individual. Is a community of people who
share ideas and opinions. Unfortunately it appears to me that his notion
of community is much more aligned with sheep following a particular
shepherd. In practice this is a negative factor in the sort of community
that Avalon is evolving into. It is also one of one of the reasons that
I believe that his departure or separation from Avalon is an important
part of enabling growth and development of Avalon. I should point out
that I view this as something in Peter's interests as much as in the
interests of the development of this community. There are clearly aims
and objectives that Peter has that he will not able to achieve here in
Avalon - and as Peter stated, this represents an on-going cause of
conflict. In turn, that conflict is reflected in division within the
community, leading fragmented development, etc.
I.e. it's not productive for Peter and its not productive for Avalon.
Peter continues:
>I propose that almost all component
>development gets done elsewhere (though we can do link back) where it
is more
>healthy environment.
This is an interesting comment. Peter's proposal would lead to something
of little to no interest here at Avalon. I'm certainly not here just to
maintain a framework and a few utilities - I'm here to do interesting
stuff in component-based development. However, when I look at his
proposal from his point of view, it does make sense - it would enable
the migration of interest that he is affiliated with to other centers of
gravity (e.g. Spice). Peter would get to run things the way he wants
with the sort of community support that would make sense (the
Peter/community chemistry equation). I think it would be the best move.
However, I think that the application of the same policies here at
Avalon would result in community destruction. In practice I happen to
think that the Avalon PMC could take a proactive role in facilitating an
amicable separation of these interests.
Peter continues:
>We also start requiring that people accept responsibility for their
actions.
This comment implies irresponsibility by others, but does not place
anything concrete on the table with which we (this community) can
address. Worse still, it is a counter example of the best practices we
should be encouraging. Instead of continued criticism of others, I would
prefer to see actions such as reaching out and offering assistance or
suggestion. This attitude is comparable to a cancer in that Peter
continually raises conflict where instead there should solutions. I can
only assume that this attitude is simply a reflection of a certain level
of frustration.
Peter continues:
>We can also implement some process that stops people chronically breaking
>code or our website as is currently the case. Maybe going as far as
removing
>privs of those who wont shape up.
Paradoxically - Peter is doing much greater damage to this community
which will inevitably lead to the application of the same principals
against Peter. Surely we should at least attempt to address the problem
before we reach the inevitable.
Peter continues:
>The effects of this will be to vastly improve dynamics here as it
removes all
>the codebases that have caused conflict and will establish Avalons
focus on
>codebases that almost all of the active Avalon developers have worked or
>collaborated on. Otherwise I can't see any other way that we will ever
return
>to a healthy project status.
I believe that the separation of the community interests and Peter’s
interests is a necessary factor in the achievement a healthy project
status. I hope Peter is willing to do this voluntarily and I am willing
to work with him on establishing a framework where we can sort this out
amicably and with due consideration for the interests of everyone concerned.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
>
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
>>> WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
>>> respect for other team members!
>>>
>>
>>
>> Let's ignore that particular comment that you noted, as a moment of
>> poorly
>> chosen display of temper.
>
>
> To the contrary - my brief but pointed reply to Pete's message was
> calmly worded with a deliberate and calculated objective. To (a) negate
> the credibility of his own message in the eyes of future Google
> navigators (after all, there were more a couple of rather disparaging
> comments that needed to be negated), and (b) express a conclusion based
> on a lot of thinking about the background issues, and taking into
> account the best interests of Peter and this community.
I must admit Steve, that is a real perverse interpretation of what
you wrote in that mail.
I quote:
"I can.
Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon."
How on earth can that be construed in any way, shape, or form as
constructive? How is that supposed to engender good will toward
Peter, when it appears that he is at least putting something on
the table that can go towards more discussion?
<hat type="PMC Chair">
To make it clear to all involved, the Stephen's comment is the
viewpoint of Stephen alone. It is not the official position of
the PMC.
The rest of us are trying to reach a common ground. Some of us
are somewhat frustrated when Peter takes such absolutist stances,
but we must come to a middle ground.
</hat>
--
"You know the world is going crazy when the best
rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy,
The Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is
accusing the US of arrogance, and Germany doesn't want
to go to war. And the 3 most powerful men in America
are named 'Bush', 'Dick', and 'Colon' (sic)".
-----Chris Rock
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
>>respect for other team members!
>>
>>
>
>Let's ignore that particular comment that you noted, as a moment of poorly
>chosen display of temper.
>
To the contrary - my brief but pointed reply to Pete's message was
calmly worded with a deliberate and calculated objective. To (a) negate
the credibility of his own message in the eyes of future Google
navigators (after all, there were more a couple of rather disparaging
comments that needed to be negated), and (b) express a conclusion based
on a lot of thinking about the background issues, and taking into
account the best interests of Peter and this community.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
RE: Politics
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
> respect for other team members!
Let's ignore that particular comment that you noted, as a moment of poorly
chosen display of temper. It is certainly not the desired goal. People are
just frustrated with the lack of demonstrable teamwork.
> I sincerely believe that he will change his attitude to a more positive
> one, given some time and some support from this community.
I'm hoping that Peter will reply to my inquiry in the thread about teamwork
and respect.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Neeme Praks <ne...@apache.org>.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
> Peter Donald wrote:
>
>> Otherwise I can't see any other way that we will ever return to a
>> healthy project status.
>
>
> I can.
> Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon.
> Cheers, Steve.
WOW, that was one constructive email... Shows real team spirit and
respect for other team members!
Exactly the kind of attitude that we are missing in avalon community! :-P
On a more serious note, I have to admit, I've also noticed that most of
Peter's recent emails have been a bit depressive, cynical and negative
(I hope that I'm not misusing the terms here). However, I do not feel
that he should be kicked out of the door right away. He probably has his
reasons for this and I respect those reasons, whatever they might be
(although I suspect that it has much to do with his recent "incident"
with the board).
I sincerely believe that he will change his attitude to a more positive
one, given some time and some support from this community.
However, with this kind of attitude like Stephen's, this will probably
never happen.
Stephen, what exactly is your issue with Peter? Anything technical?
Personality clash?
Just trying to identify (and hopefully solve) the issue here, no hard
feelings for anyone...
Rgds,
Neeme
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Stephen McConnell <mc...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
>Otherwise I can't see any other way that we will ever return
>to a healthy project status.
>
I can.
Dismiss Peter Donald from Avalon.
Cheers, Steve.
--
Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org
http://www.osm.net
Sent via James running under Merlin as an NT service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
hi,
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 19:37, Neeme Praks wrote:
> Can we clean this mess? Just write down the things that are bothering
> you and then we can address these issues.
I just wrote a long email on all the problems in Avalon and it ended up
several pages long. Basically the same points I have been complaining about
for ages. Some of those problems are unlikely to go away. Rather than repeat
it all maybe it is best to say what I think is best for Avalon.
Basically we still have one man code bases, crapola code, and other stuff that
is only going to cause conflict. I propose that almost all component
development gets done elsewhere (though we can do link back) where it is more
healthy environment. I would suggest jakarta-commons in most cases if
collaboration is the goal of components. I would propose that the only
solution is to get back to a single code base that everyone accepts and will
work on. So we burn away all other code in Avalon so that there is just the
following;
avalon-site
avalon-framework
excalibur-fortress
excalibur-lifecycle
excalibur-instrument(* ???)
excalibur-logger
excalibur-pool (but we deprecate this - and possibly merge into following)
excalibur-component (but we deprecate this)
excalibur-compatability (but we deprecate this)
and possibly avalon-logkit.
We also move to maven as build system to stop the chances of code getting
broken due to poor process. We can use it to enforce certain quality controls
and release processes.
We also start requiring that people accept responsibility for their actions.
We can also implement some process that stops people chronically breaking
code or our website as is currently the case. Maybe going as far as removing
privs of those who wont shape up.
The effects of this will be to vastly improve dynamics here as it removes all
the codebases that have caused conflict and will establish Avalons focus on
codebases that almost all of the active Avalon developers have worked or
collaborated on. Otherwise I can't see any other way that we will ever return
to a healthy project status.
In time if this is successful and people start collaborating again then we can
establish an Avalon-Commons (though personally I think it would be far better
to still do it in Jakarta-Commons).
> I remember that some time back we established a rule that "everything
> should be discussed on the public-list". So, if someone attacks you in
> private, I recommend forwarding this to the public list (in the case of
> attacking, I'm not sure if you should care about the other person's
> privacy). Only then, we as a community/team, can take proper action.
> So, can you provide us with some real "evidence"?
Not going to publish emails sent to me privately. Those who sent the emails
are on this list and are free to publish the emails here - especially if they
feel I have misrepresented their actions.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fools ignore complexity. Pragmatists suffer it.
Some can avoid it. Geniuses remove it.
-- Perlis's Programming Proverb #58, SIGPLAN Notices, Sept. 1982
----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics
Posted by Neeme Praks <ne...@apache.org>.
Uh-oh... (getting on my asbesto suite) ...I just have to jump in on this
one with some IM(H)Os...
Peter Donald wrote:
>>However, it is also just as common for people to *assume* that the
>>reasons are "fickle" or "vindictive" when in truth they are not--
>>simply because they came from someone you don't particularly like.
>>
>>
>Has nothing to do with that. Even if that were true it is irrelevent. The
>people who put in the work are not the ones who get to make the decisions.
>
>You keep waving the Avalon-Commons banner and yet that is probably the worst
>thing to do. Quite a few Cocoon developers have expressed disgust at the way
>Avalon has handled the "cocoon" components - many have said it was a mistake
>for them ever to move here (I think Stefano may have even done it on a public
>mailing list?). I can't help but agree.
>
>Anyone who is thinking about contributing to Avalon-Commons I will tell
>exactly how Avalon operates. I will also show them all the little "decisions"
>that were made on behalf of those who contribute by those who don't
>contribute and went against the wishes of those who contribute.
>
>In the end I can't see anyone from turbine or maven wanting to migrate
>anything here. Too likely that they will be blocked or development hampered.
>For the sake of cocoon I would suggest that they not move any new components
>here but keep them where they are or move them to commons instead.
>
FUD-FUD-FUD-FUD-FUD-FUD-FUD!
You keep on referring to some non-public discussions and personal
feelings without bringing any facts to the table.
Can we clean this mess? Just write down the things that are bothering
you and then we can address these issues.
For example:
1. who is putting in the work and who is making the descisions?
2. Cocoon components: can you provide some references to this "disgust"
and the exact problems we have had. If we know what are the issues, then
we can take a shot at resolving them. Without knowing the issues, there
is no hope of resolving them.
3. little "descisions": can you bring out all your dirty laundry on this
list first, before you start dumping it to our potential "customers"?:
3.1 how exactly does Avalon operate in your mind and what is wrong
with that?
3.2 can you show us the little "descisions" that you are referring
to? Probably related to point 1?
If any of the issues have been brough up before, then just provide some
references to the archives.
If we just sit on our asses and whine about the fact how much injustice
is in the world, nothing will change... Let's try to fix what's wrong.
Not that it hasn't tried before... I just believe that everybody hasn't
brought all the issues on the table yet... if all the issues have been
discusses and addressed, then why keep on whining? If the issues have
been discussed and addressed, but the result has not been any good, then
we need to do follow-up on this "addressing process" until we finally
have managed to get rid of all/most of the non-desired behaviour.
>Team implies respect and the desire to work together which is not the case
>here and quite frankly is unlikely to ever be the case.
>
>It rarely goes a few days without one of the usual suspects attacking me.
>Today I was attacked for violating Apaches copyright - oh wait ... it turns
>out I wasn't. A few days ago I was attacked for stealing ****ideas**** from
>cornerstone ... oh and the ideas I "stole" were from components I originally
>wrote aswell. A few days before that there was another idiocy. I am sure in
>another few days someone will attack me for some other manufactured and
>likely childish reason. Does this sound like a healthy environment? To me it
>sounds like people have more interest in trying to hurt the competition than
>trying to work together.
>
I remember that some time back we established a rule that "everything
should be discussed on the public-list". So, if someone attacks you in
private, I recommend forwarding this to the public list (in the case of
attacking, I'm not sure if you should care about the other person's
privacy). Only then, we as a community/team, can take proper action.
So, can you provide us with some real "evidence"?
And all the potential "attackers" should also do all their "attacks" on
the public list, otherwise this will only create evermore tension inside
the community (as we can observe).
I still haven't lost my hope in this community, but it seems that Peter
has... maybe we can still undo some of that damage?
Rgds,
Neeme
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Team = respect and the desire to work together
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Thu, 1 May 2003 09:21, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> So let us operate on the belief that you want to see a healthy cooperative
> team at work here. How do you believe that can be achieved?
As I said before - clean the slate and make sure no causes of conflict are
introduced from that point onwards.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
----------------------------------------
Whatever you do will be insignificant,
but it is very important that you do it.
--Gandhi
----------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Team = respect and the desire to work together
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> Team implies respect and the desire to work together which is not
> the case here and quite frankly is unlikely to ever be the case.
Peter, is it safe to say that you would LIKE for this to change? You have
posted several messages recently that imply that you want to work together,
and your continued presence suggests that as well.
So let us operate on the belief that you want to see a healthy cooperative
team at work here. How do you believe that can be achieved?
It would be immeasurably helpful if you would please make a conscious effort
to focus on the constructive things that you would like to see, and skip the
negative things that you don't want to see.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics (was Re: Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release)
Posted by Federico Barbieri <fe...@betaversion.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
>
> Team implies respect and the desire to work together which is not the case
> here and quite frankly is unlikely to ever be the case.
Agree. As long as you'll keep this destructive attitude it's very
unlikely to ever be the case.
fede
--
If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research,
would it?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: avalon-commons
Posted by Neeme Praks <ne...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 02:03, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>
>>They were more supportive of opening up an "Avalon Commons" of sorts.
>>
>>
>I didn't get that. Actually I got quite the opposite - it was you who seemed
>to be pushing for that.
>
>
As I see it, the results from that "Query: Hosting Avalon Components"
thread are:
* if some commons component has an avalon wrapper, keep it in commons,
together with the project
* having only a wrapper hosted at commons (without the actual project
code) is not desirable. rather, these wrappers should be in avalon-commons
* all such cases should be considered case-by-case, but the general
feeling is towards avalon-commons, unless the project is already in
jakarta-commons
For me personally, the impression from that discussion is, that nobody
is really objecting to having wrapper code in jakarta-commons (this will
be anyway handled case-by-case) but the recommended direction is towards
avalon-commons.
Some references:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/22864
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/22873
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/22813
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.commons.devel/22823
Just trying to keep the discussion above the emotional level...
Rgds,
Neeme
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Politics (was Re: Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release)
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Sat, 26 Apr 2003 02:03, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> They were more supportive of opening up an "Avalon Commons" of sorts.
I didn't get that. Actually I got quite the opposite - it was you who seemed
to be pushing for that.
> Now, as to blocking development for "fickle" or "vindictive" reasons, it
> is those perceptions and in the past actions that have directly
> contributed to the more political atmosphere we have.
>
> Dismantling that is tricky.
no it is not. You require that people who are making the decisions be people
who have contributed to and maintain the product. Certain things do need
oversight but generally product changes are not one of them.
> However, it is also just as common for people to *assume* that the
> reasons are "fickle" or "vindictive" when in truth they are not--
> simply because they came from someone you don't particularly like.
Has nothing to do with that. Even if that were true it is irrelevent. The
people who put in the work are not the ones who get to make the decisions.
You keep waving the Avalon-Commons banner and yet that is probably the worst
thing to do. Quite a few Cocoon developers have expressed disgust at the way
Avalon has handled the "cocoon" components - many have said it was a mistake
for them ever to move here (I think Stefano may have even done it on a public
mailing list?). I can't help but agree.
Anyone who is thinking about contributing to Avalon-Commons I will tell
exactly how Avalon operates. I will also show them all the little "decisions"
that were made on behalf of those who contribute by those who don't
contribute and went against the wishes of those who contribute.
In the end I can't see anyone from turbine or maven wanting to migrate
anything here. Too likely that they will be blocked or development hampered.
For the sake of cocoon I would suggest that they not move any new components
here but keep them where they are or move them to commons instead.
> Here's the deal, we are a team. Like it or not the folks who make
> up this team need to work *together*.
Team implies respect and the desire to work together which is not the case
here and quite frankly is unlikely to ever be the case.
It rarely goes a few days without one of the usual suspects attacking me.
Today I was attacked for violating Apaches copyright - oh wait ... it turns
out I wasn't. A few days ago I was attacked for stealing ****ideas**** from
cornerstone ... oh and the ideas I "stole" were from components I originally
wrote aswell. A few days before that there was another idiocy. I am sure in
another few days someone will attack me for some other manufactured and
likely childish reason. Does this sound like a healthy environment? To me it
sounds like people have more interest in trying to hurt the competition than
trying to work together.
As it stands the damage is slowly being routed around. If you are unwilling to
take the steps required to fix Avalon then the current pattern will continue
and it does not take a brain surgeon to figure out where that leads.
Everytime decisions are made that go against the wishes of those who actually
do work you are not doing avalon any favours. Everytime you introduce more
beuracracy you are going to loose what makes opensource go around and
everytime you let things like the AMTAG proposal through you lower the level
a respect just that little bit more.
> > So far I have made several complaints to you on and off list. You have
> > chosen not to act.
> >
> > That simple.
>
> You have perceived inaction, when I have acted--but not gotten back to
> you. For that I appologize.
Feel free to start resolving some of the issues then. For many issues, I have
seen zero results so I assumed you had taken zero action.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*---------------------------------------------------------*
| Contrary to popular belief, UNIX is user-friendly. It |
| just happens to be selective on who it makes friendship |
| with. |
| - Richard Cook |
*---------------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Politics (was Re: Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release)
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 22:31, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>>>Could you point out exactly where you asked this? I know there is a bit
>>>of stuff already in commons that binds to avalon services and there is
>>>quite a few people who are interested in supporting avalon based services
>>>there. I would say it is much more likely that a wider variety of Avalon
>>>users would collaborate there than here.
>>
>>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=105121643000006&r=1&w=2
>
>
> Funny - the only push back I see is from Costin (no surprise there) and Juozas
> Baliuka (and he only objects because of visibility loss). I saw others
> supportive of the idea and given how negatively and confrontational you
> presented the case there is no surpise really.
They were more supportive of opening up an "Avalon Commons" of sorts.
>>Leave the politic comments out of it. The reason for the "politics" is
>>a direct result of a small number of developers.
>
>
> nope. It is a result of people having power without ever contributing. Why
> would people contribute something when they know that someone else can block
> development for fickle, vindictive reasons? And the blockers need never use,
> contribute to nor have any intention to contribute to the component at hand.
And it is that attitude that I personally cannot change. It requires
that those people have to want to change.
Now, as to blocking development for "fickle" or "vindictive" reasons, it
is those perceptions and in the past actions that have directly
contributed to the more political atmosphere we have.
Dismantling that is tricky.
However, it is also just as common for people to *assume* that the
reasons are "fickle" or "vindictive" when in truth they are not--
simply because they came from someone you don't particularly like.
Here's the deal, we are a team. Like it or not the folks who make
up this team need to work *together*.
What I need everyone to do is start being objective. Think long
term, but keep an eye on short and medium term goals. Just because
your personality clashes with someone doesn't mean that they are
out to "get" you. If they are, that will have to be addressed
as well.
>> It is a problem I am
>>attempting to address/squash--but I need all of your help to do it.
>
>
> So far I have made several complaints to you on and off list. You have chosen
> not to act.
>
> That simple.
You have perceived inaction, when I have acted--but not gotten back to
you. For that I appologize. Please bear in mind that I have become
increasingly busy recently, with more responsibility at my paying
job, more responsibility with this group, and more responsibility with
JSR 111 (it is a matter of public record now, I am the new spec lead).
I cannot be superman, the best I can do is the best I can do.
As to making this a less political place, the responsibility rests with
all of us. That means we each have a responsibility (you, me, everyone)
to learn how to work together and communicate ideas.
There are many contributing factors to where we are, but only one real
solution. We have to think and act like a team.
--
"You know the world is going crazy when the best
rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy,
The Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is
accusing the US of arrogance, and Germany doesn't want
to go to war. And the 3 most powerful men in America
are named 'Bush', 'Dick', and 'Colon' (sic)".
-----Chris Rock
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 22:31, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > Could you point out exactly where you asked this? I know there is a bit
> > of stuff already in commons that binds to avalon services and there is
> > quite a few people who are interested in supporting avalon based services
> > there. I would say it is much more likely that a wider variety of Avalon
> > users would collaborate there than here.
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=105121643000006&r=1&w=2
Funny - the only push back I see is from Costin (no surprise there) and Juozas
Baliuka (and he only objects because of visibility loss). I saw others
supportive of the idea and given how negatively and confrontational you
presented the case there is no surpise really.
Perhaps if you attempted to do it in a non-confrontational way and maybe put a
little effort into working with other Avalon users (James, Cocoon, Turbine)
and got them onboard then I suspect that there would be a lot more support.
> Leave the politic comments out of it. The reason for the "politics" is
> a direct result of a small number of developers.
nope. It is a result of people having power without ever contributing. Why
would people contribute something when they know that someone else can block
development for fickle, vindictive reasons? And the blockers need never use,
contribute to nor have any intention to contribute to the component at hand.
> It is a problem I am
> attempting to address/squash--but I need all of your help to do it.
So far I have made several complaints to you on and off list. You have chosen
not to act.
That simple.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*------------------------------------------------*
| Trying is the first step to failure. |
| So never try, Lisa - Homer Jay Simpson |
*------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Peter Donald wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 06:50, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>
>>5) Initial feedback from Jakarta Commons indicates we should
>> host Avalon specific stuff (i.e. requires Framework JAR)
>> here. Further clarification pending.
>
>
> Could you point out exactly where you asked this? I know there is a bit of
> stuff already in commons that binds to avalon services and there is quite a
> few people who are interested in supporting avalon based services there. I
> would say it is much more likely that a wider variety of Avalon users would
> collaborate there than here.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=105121643000006&r=1&w=2
> Especially given that jakarta-commons-sandbox looks like it will be opened up
> to all of Apache. There is at least one commons committer who is going to
> push to have jakarta-commons opened up in a similar manner in a few months.
> Rather than attempting to isolate from the rest of Apache would it not be
> better to try and collaborate with them?
We aren't isolating, we are opening up.
>>It looks as if the best option is to open up Excalibur/Sandbox
>>to allow Cocoon/FOP/JAMES to maintain the required components
>>here.
>>
>>Are there any other issues that I am missing?
>
>
> Avalon does not have the infrastructure to support it. Even regardless of that
> I know that several people who are working on Avalon components will not work
> in Avalon-land.
That's a problem that has to be fixed. If they are working on
components outside of Avalon, that really doesn't bother me. The fact
is that some folks will, if we give them the power to do it.
> The simple fact of the matter is that the PMC does not empower those who do
> the work and gives politics more precedence than anything else it seems. We
> still have vetos being cast for non-technical reasons and the PMC does not go
> meep. Even better is that some vetos are ignored because "the PMC decided
> so". Even when technical matters are rationally discussed (which seems a
> rarity) they are often politically motivated.
Leave the politic comments out of it. The reason for the "politics" is
a direct result of a small number of developers. It is a problem I am
attempting to address/squash--but I need all of your help to do it.
That simple.
--
"You know the world is going crazy when the best
rapper is a white guy, the best golfer is a black guy,
The Swiss hold the America's Cup, France is
accusing the US of arrogance, and Germany doesn't want
to go to war. And the 3 most powerful men in America
are named 'Bush', 'Dick', and 'Colon' (sic)".
-----Chris Rock
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org
Re: Evaluation of Excalibur Phase III Release
Posted by Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org>.
On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 06:50, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> There is also a question on whether these components should be
> hosted here or not. To answer that question, I asked for some
> input from various groups.
>
> 1) Most concerns of maintenance can be dealt with if Excalibur
> and Sandbox are opened up to a wider Apache audience.
Not my concerns.
> 5) Initial feedback from Jakarta Commons indicates we should
> host Avalon specific stuff (i.e. requires Framework JAR)
> here. Further clarification pending.
Could you point out exactly where you asked this? I know there is a bit of
stuff already in commons that binds to avalon services and there is quite a
few people who are interested in supporting avalon based services there. I
would say it is much more likely that a wider variety of Avalon users would
collaborate there than here.
Especially given that jakarta-commons-sandbox looks like it will be opened up
to all of Apache. There is at least one commons committer who is going to
push to have jakarta-commons opened up in a similar manner in a few months.
Rather than attempting to isolate from the rest of Apache would it not be
better to try and collaborate with them?
> It looks as if the best option is to open up Excalibur/Sandbox
> to allow Cocoon/FOP/JAMES to maintain the required components
> here.
>
> Are there any other issues that I am missing?
Avalon does not have the infrastructure to support it. Even regardless of that
I know that several people who are working on Avalon components will not work
in Avalon-land.
The simple fact of the matter is that the PMC does not empower those who do
the work and gives politics more precedence than anything else it seems. We
still have vetos being cast for non-technical reasons and the PMC does not go
meep. Even better is that some vetos are ignored because "the PMC decided
so". Even when technical matters are rationally discussed (which seems a
rarity) they are often politically motivated.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
*----------------------------------------------------*
| "the mother of idiots is always pregnant." |
*----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@avalon.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@avalon.apache.org