You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "John D. Ament" <jo...@gmail.com> on 2014/11/23 03:16:35 UTC
Proposals - wiki required?
All,
The current way the proposal page is written, the wiki for proposals is
optional. I don't think this is the case any longer, since it looks like
we request that all proposals get put there first.
Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
wiki for proposals?
John
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 23 November 2014 at 03:16, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> The current way the proposal page is written, the wiki for proposals is
> optional. I don't think this is the case any longer, since it looks like
> we request that all proposals get put there first.
>
> Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
> wiki for proposals?
>
+1. to be honest I thought it was mandatory.
rgds
jan i.
>
> John
>
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Yep, I think I understood which proposal page to which you refer to.
My opinion is still the same. It doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the proposal includes the entire proposal. We should always be thinking less rules, less process, less roles.
Incubation is already a bewildering experience for podlings and the solution is not more rules and codification. We need to be fostering a culture of letting the non-critical things slide by.
jmho :D
Regards,
Alan
On Nov 23, 2014, at 6:50 AM, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alan,
>
> I'm referring to [1], where under Developing The Proposal and The Vote it
> seems to list the wiki as "one solution" or "an option" rather than the
> proper place to put proposals. Not any specific proposal that has come up
> recently.
>
> John
>
> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#formulating
>
> On Sun Nov 23 2014 at 9:42:28 AM Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 22, 2014, at 6:16 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> The current way the proposal page is written, the wiki for proposals is
>>> optional. I don't think this is the case any longer, since it looks like
>>> we request that all proposals get put there first.
>>
>> Other IPMC member’s strongly held opinions should not be interpreted as
>> hard rules.
>>
>>> Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
>>> wiki for proposals?
>>
>> I’m sorry I was “out" the past few weeks. What proposal attempted to post
>> a proposal that was not on the wiki? What problem did that cause?
>>
>> IMO, it doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the proposal
>> includes the entire proposal. We should always be thinking less rules,
>> less process, less roles.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@gmail.com>.
Alan,
I'm referring to [1], where under Developing The Proposal and The Vote it
seems to list the wiki as "one solution" or "an option" rather than the
proper place to put proposals. Not any specific proposal that has come up
recently.
John
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#formulating
On Sun Nov 23 2014 at 9:42:28 AM Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>
wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 2014, at 6:16 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > The current way the proposal page is written, the wiki for proposals is
> > optional. I don't think this is the case any longer, since it looks like
> > we request that all proposals get put there first.
>
> Other IPMC member’s strongly held opinions should not be interpreted as
> hard rules.
>
> > Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
> > wiki for proposals?
>
> I’m sorry I was “out" the past few weeks. What proposal attempted to post
> a proposal that was not on the wiki? What problem did that cause?
>
> IMO, it doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the proposal
> includes the entire proposal. We should always be thinking less rules,
> less process, less roles.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
RE: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
I'd like it to remain pink please.
(look up bikeshedding on Wikipedia if this makes no sense)
Trying to be more constrictive...
Proposal docs are useful. The wiki is a convenient place to find them after the fact (something I find necessary at least once a month for at least one podling). Whatever the docs say about SHOULD or MUST, the fact is we put the proposal in the wiki by tradition for good reasons.
Unless tradition is causing a problem there is no problem.
Do we want to codify tradition? Most of our policies are flexible where they need to be (which is almost everywhere), its part of the strength of the foundation. In this case a proposal not being in the wiki would cause no irreversible harm (a minor inconvenience, yes, harm no)
Is it really worth a long debate on general@?
In conclusion, I don't care, as long as it remains the traditional pink, I happen to like it that way.
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: jan i<ma...@apache.org>
Sent: 11/23/2014 11:00 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Proposals - wiki required?
On 23 November 2014 at 19:41, Alan Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 23, 2014, at 8:40 AM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I dont want to criminalize anybody, but on the other hand I would like to
> > have 1 common place where to look for accepted proposals.
> >
> > Having the proposals, at least after acceptance, in one place should be
> > beneficial to everyone, so how about wording it as a strong suggestion.
>
> Let's look at how the proposal process works. It starts with a proposal
> email. We don't troll a particular web space looking for new proposals.
> Dictating that the proposals start in one place needlessly adds rules that
> don't solve any problems.
>
> As for storing them in one place after acceptance, why?
>
SImple so that new "recruits" can go and get ideas of how to interpret the
different headlines. The headlines might be simple to you, but I had to
look at some proposals to understand some of the headlines.
I am champion for 2 projects (one seems to go in another direction) and
found it very useful to point the projects at the wiki. It saved my quite a
lot of explanations (and discussions). I have found that projects who want
to join, dont really understand how/why a proposal is needed, giving
examples of successful projects makes that part a lot easier.
>
> Adding strongly worded "should"s dilutes guidelines and adds to the
> reading homework of new podlings that will already have the good sense to
> use a wiki, or something better that us old folk haven't thought of.
>
Like you I am against "rules", and I don't care whether its wiki or foo, I
simply like to know where I can find "real life" proposals. My idea of
using "should" instead of "rule" was to signal, that it must be stored
somewhere, preferable (for now) in wiki.
Seen with my iPMC hat on, it is a bit of history that we should not throw
away, I used it a couple of times on a couple of projects to see how they
have evolved.
But of course it is just my opinion, and if everybody else think
differently, then I will not be the one who are difficult.
rgds
jan i.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@gmail.com>.
So, my intention wasn't to start a big argument.
If the feeling is that the page describes the behavior correctly let's
leave it. It seemed to me like we wanted all proposals to be up on the
wiki, based on the way some of the comments have come through...
John
On Sun Nov 23 2014 at 2:59:31 PM Dennis E. Hamilton <de...@acm.org>
wrote:
> +1 on Jan's observations, below.
>
> Also, from my experience with the Proposal for Apache OpenOffice and a few
> others, there is considerable refinement of proposals from first draft to
> the version that is essentially frozen at the time of podling-acceptance
> balloting. The Wiki is perfect for this, as is community involvement in
> the refinement. (Some podling proposals are a bit more "closely-held" than
> the way the AOO one was developed and edited, so *maybe* that doesn't
> matter so much.) The key thing is that early proposals are moving targets
> and while some are advanced by a single benevolent editor, it is useful to
> have a wiki for the ground-truth du jour, addition of initial committers,
> etc.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jan i [mailto:jani@apache.org]
> Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 11:00
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Proposals - wiki required?
>
> On 23 November 2014 at 19:41, Alan Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > As for storing them in one place after acceptance, why?
> >
> SImple so that new "recruits" can go and get ideas of how to interpret the
> different headlines. The headlines might be simple to you, but I had to
> look at some proposals to understand some of the headlines.
>
> I am champion for 2 projects (one seems to go in another direction) and
> found it very useful to point the projects at the wiki. It saved my quite a
> lot of explanations (and discussions). I have found that projects who want
> to join, dont really understand how/why a proposal is needed, giving
> examples of successful projects makes that part a lot easier.
>
>
> >
> > Adding strongly worded "should"s dilutes guidelines and adds to the
> > reading homework of new podlings that will already have the good sense to
> > use a wiki, or something better that us old folk haven't thought of.
> >
>
> Like you I am against "rules", and I don't care whether its wiki or foo, I
> simply like to know where I can find "real life" proposals. My idea of
> using "should" instead of "rule" was to signal, that it must be stored
> somewhere, preferable (for now) in wiki.
>
> Seen with my iPMC hat on, it is a bit of history that we should not throw
> away, I used it a couple of times on a couple of projects to see how they
> have evolved.
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
RE: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
+1 on Jan's observations, below.
Also, from my experience with the Proposal for Apache OpenOffice and a few others, there is considerable refinement of proposals from first draft to the version that is essentially frozen at the time of podling-acceptance balloting. The Wiki is perfect for this, as is community involvement in the refinement. (Some podling proposals are a bit more "closely-held" than the way the AOO one was developed and edited, so *maybe* that doesn't matter so much.) The key thing is that early proposals are moving targets and while some are advanced by a single benevolent editor, it is useful to have a wiki for the ground-truth du jour, addition of initial committers, etc.
-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [mailto:jani@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2014 11:00
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Proposals - wiki required?
On 23 November 2014 at 19:41, Alan Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
[ ... ]
> As for storing them in one place after acceptance, why?
>
SImple so that new "recruits" can go and get ideas of how to interpret the
different headlines. The headlines might be simple to you, but I had to
look at some proposals to understand some of the headlines.
I am champion for 2 projects (one seems to go in another direction) and
found it very useful to point the projects at the wiki. It saved my quite a
lot of explanations (and discussions). I have found that projects who want
to join, dont really understand how/why a proposal is needed, giving
examples of successful projects makes that part a lot easier.
>
> Adding strongly worded "should"s dilutes guidelines and adds to the
> reading homework of new podlings that will already have the good sense to
> use a wiki, or something better that us old folk haven't thought of.
>
Like you I am against "rules", and I don't care whether its wiki or foo, I
simply like to know where I can find "real life" proposals. My idea of
using "should" instead of "rule" was to signal, that it must be stored
somewhere, preferable (for now) in wiki.
Seen with my iPMC hat on, it is a bit of history that we should not throw
away, I used it a couple of times on a couple of projects to see how they
have evolved.
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 23 November 2014 at 19:41, Alan Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 23, 2014, at 8:40 AM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I dont want to criminalize anybody, but on the other hand I would like to
> > have 1 common place where to look for accepted proposals.
> >
> > Having the proposals, at least after acceptance, in one place should be
> > beneficial to everyone, so how about wording it as a strong suggestion.
>
> Let's look at how the proposal process works. It starts with a proposal
> email. We don't troll a particular web space looking for new proposals.
> Dictating that the proposals start in one place needlessly adds rules that
> don't solve any problems.
>
> As for storing them in one place after acceptance, why?
>
SImple so that new "recruits" can go and get ideas of how to interpret the
different headlines. The headlines might be simple to you, but I had to
look at some proposals to understand some of the headlines.
I am champion for 2 projects (one seems to go in another direction) and
found it very useful to point the projects at the wiki. It saved my quite a
lot of explanations (and discussions). I have found that projects who want
to join, dont really understand how/why a proposal is needed, giving
examples of successful projects makes that part a lot easier.
>
> Adding strongly worded "should"s dilutes guidelines and adds to the
> reading homework of new podlings that will already have the good sense to
> use a wiki, or something better that us old folk haven't thought of.
>
Like you I am against "rules", and I don't care whether its wiki or foo, I
simply like to know where I can find "real life" proposals. My idea of
using "should" instead of "rule" was to signal, that it must be stored
somewhere, preferable (for now) in wiki.
Seen with my iPMC hat on, it is a bit of history that we should not throw
away, I used it a couple of times on a couple of projects to see how they
have evolved.
But of course it is just my opinion, and if everybody else think
differently, then I will not be the one who are difficult.
rgds
jan i.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by Alan Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
> On Nov 23, 2014, at 8:40 AM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I dont want to criminalize anybody, but on the other hand I would like to
> have 1 common place where to look for accepted proposals.
>
> Having the proposals, at least after acceptance, in one place should be
> beneficial to everyone, so how about wording it as a strong suggestion.
Let's look at how the proposal process works. It starts with a proposal email. We don't troll a particular web space looking for new proposals. Dictating that the proposals start in one place needlessly adds rules that don't solve any problems.
As for storing them in one place after acceptance, why?
Adding strongly worded "should"s dilutes guidelines and adds to the reading homework of new podlings that will already have the good sense to use a wiki, or something better that us old folk haven't thought of.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 23 November 2014 at 17:20, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>
wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
> >> wiki for proposals?
> >
> > I’m sorry I was “out" the past few weeks. What proposal attempted to
> post a
> > proposal that was not on the wiki? What problem did that cause?
>
> I agree that we don't want to criminalize failure to adhere to procedural
> minutiae.
>
> > IMO, it doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the
> proposal
> > includes the entire proposal.
>
> It would be inconvenient if people don't use the wiki or some other form
> where
> the evolution of the proposal can be inspected using diffs. Close reading
> of
> proposal text is costly; serious flaws can hide in small crevices. We
> don't
> want those weighing a proposal to have to perform careful review a second
> time
> for the VOTE thread.
>
> However, until there's an actual problem with people not using the wiki, we
> don't want to put ourselves in a position where we say "you MUST use the
> wiki"
> and then ignore our own rules and accept a proposal anyway.
>
> > We should always be thinking less rules, less process, less roles.
>
> +1
>
> Rules which are byzantine and opaque are hard to follow and hard to
> enforce.
> Cumbersome regulation favors the establishment, and we want to foster
> innovation by newcomers.
>
I think I am a bit lost here, or we talk in reality about 2 themes.
I dont want to criminalize anybody, but on the other hand I would like to
have 1 common place where to look for accepted proposals.
Having the proposals, at least after acceptance, in one place should be
beneficial to everyone, so how about wording it as a strong suggestion.
rgds
jan i.
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>.
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com> wrote:
>> IMO, it doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the proposal
>> includes the entire proposal.
>
> It would be inconvenient if people don't use the wiki or some other form where
> the evolution of the proposal can be inspected using diffs. Close reading of
> proposal text is costly; serious flaws can hide in small crevices. We don't
> want those weighing a proposal to have to perform careful review a second time
> for the VOTE thread.
Huge +1 to this consideration. The way it works for me: when anybody is asking
me to do work for that person (read proposal, formulate opinion, vote)
the easiest
way to get that work done is to make it *easier* for *me* to do it.
You don't have
to, of course. Just like I don't *have* to vote on every single proposal.
May be I'm in the minority, but tracking proposal evolution on a wiki-like
medium makes it easier for me.
The call, of course, belongs to the one who actually wants the proposal
to be accepted.
Thanks,
Roman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by Marvin Humphrey <ma...@rectangular.com>.
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <li...@toolazydogs.com> wrote:
>> Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
>> wiki for proposals?
>
> I’m sorry I was “out" the past few weeks. What proposal attempted to post a
> proposal that was not on the wiki? What problem did that cause?
I agree that we don't want to criminalize failure to adhere to procedural
minutiae.
> IMO, it doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the proposal
> includes the entire proposal.
It would be inconvenient if people don't use the wiki or some other form where
the evolution of the proposal can be inspected using diffs. Close reading of
proposal text is costly; serious flaws can hide in small crevices. We don't
want those weighing a proposal to have to perform careful review a second time
for the VOTE thread.
However, until there's an actual problem with people not using the wiki, we
don't want to put ourselves in a position where we say "you MUST use the wiki"
and then ignore our own rules and accept a proposal anyway.
> We should always be thinking less rules, less process, less roles.
+1
Rules which are byzantine and opaque are hard to follow and hard to enforce.
Cumbersome regulation favors the establishment, and we want to foster
innovation by newcomers.
Marvin Humphrey
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Proposals - wiki required?
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On Nov 22, 2014, at 6:16 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> The current way the proposal page is written, the wiki for proposals is
> optional. I don't think this is the case any longer, since it looks like
> we request that all proposals get put there first.
Other IPMC member’s strongly held opinions should not be interpreted as hard rules.
> Does anyone mind if I rephrase the page to make it mandatory to use the
> wiki for proposals?
I’m sorry I was “out" the past few weeks. What proposal attempted to post a proposal that was not on the wiki? What problem did that cause?
IMO, it doesn’t matter so long as the original vote to accept the proposal includes the entire proposal. We should always be thinking less rules, less process, less roles.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org