You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> on 2016/09/25 07:20:02 UTC
OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
If people see a possible issue or are in doubt with a proposition, I propose they quickly put a -1 as they would put a +1 on the contrary.
It would not a be vote, but then we would know that there is a kind of disagreement, but not yet time to explain it clearly.
And we would know we need to wait a bit more than normally and especially ask the persons who are concerned why they are.
Then we would wait their answers in a reasonable delay. By convention this would be 3 days.
I propose this rule to be written in a set of OFBiz specific rules which AFAIK are still to be written.
So this would be the first and we would create a prominent wiki page for that.
I think that by written OFBiz specific rules in a wiki page it will clarify the situations in most cases. We would of course add new OFBiz specific
rules when a new case would be crossed.
What do you think? Of course, here again lazy consensus apply https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus but you might already use
the proposition above...
Jacques
Le 24/09/2016 � 23:39, Scott Gray a �crit :
> - I think you rely on lazy consensus too much. Not many contributors have
> as much time as you to give to the project and formulating an argument
> against something (and then continuing the discussion) can take up a lot of
> time and energy. In my experience people are generally very quick to agree
> to good ideas (because it takes no effort other than to reply +1) so if you
> get*no* responses then you should IMO take pause before pushing ahead.
>
> Regards
> Scott
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
Well yes and no, I think there should be a delay to continue the
conversation but no assumption of a lazy consensus. As I mentioned earlier,
your high level of activity can be overwhelming for regular contributors
and offering a delay doesn't remove the amount of time required to respond
to the high number of topics you initiate.
If I could offer a single piece of advice to you, it would be to slow down.
Work on things that are obviously non-contentious and try to limit the
discussions that turn out to be contentious. I'm not saying don't have
them, but just try to space them out a bit so regular contributors have
time to digest them along with their own interests.
Regards
Scott
On 25/09/2016 20:20, "Jacques Le Roux" <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> If people see a possible issue or are in doubt with a proposition, I
> propose they quickly put a -1 as they would put a +1 on the contrary.
> It would not a be vote, but then we would know that there is a kind of
> disagreement, but not yet time to explain it clearly.
> And we would know we need to wait a bit more than normally and especially
> ask the persons who are concerned why they are.
> Then we would wait their answers in a reasonable delay. By convention this
> would be 3 days.
>
> I propose this rule to be written in a set of OFBiz specific rules which
> AFAIK are still to be written.
> So this would be the first and we would create a prominent wiki page for
> that.
>
> I think that by written OFBiz specific rules in a wiki page it will
> clarify the situations in most cases. We would of course add new OFBiz
> specific rules when a new case would be crossed.
>
> What do you think? Of course, here again lazy consensus apply
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus but you might
> already use the proposition above...
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 24/09/2016 à 23:39, Scott Gray a écrit :
>
>> - I think you rely on lazy consensus too much. Not many contributors have
>> as much time as you to give to the project and formulating an argument
>> against something (and then continuing the discussion) can take up a lot
>> of
>> time and energy. In my experience people are generally very quick to
>> agree
>> to good ideas (because it takes no effort other than to reply +1) so if
>> you
>> get*no* responses then you should IMO take pause before pushing ahead.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com>.
Since when has it been a bad thing to be active in an open-source community?
Just by looking at the contributions made, that seems like an odd discussion
to have
https://github.com/apache/ofbiz/graphs/contributors
There is no doubt that without people like jacques the project would be a
wasteland. Again: i think this email thread is running off topic - it really
seems like this is better suited for private mailings.
--
View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695244.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
When they're lazy consensus which demands a response and also overwhelming
us, well then things get difficult and I don't feel bad about about raising
it as an issue. I'm grateful for the commitment to the project but if I
can't keep up then I don't know how else to respond. What else do you
suggest?
Regards
Scott
On 25/09/2016 22:10, "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I won't ask such a thing of any contributor. Maybe you (or others) feel the
> need to dictate how and when other volunteers spend their energy on the
> itches they want/need to scratch.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Scott Gray <scott.gray@hotwaxsystems.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > Is it a complicated thing to ask our most prolific contributor to slow
> down
> > so that we can all be effectively involved? Personally I don't think it
> is
> > complicated.
> >
> > On 25/09/2016 22:03, "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Everyone participating can be blamed for complaints, or needlessly
> > > prolonging discussions. Some want to discuss everything, Some blame the
> > > other contributor.
> > >
> > > Does the blame game help the project? Instead of pointing out the
> 'flaw'
> > in
> > > other, it is better to apply some introspection first wit respect to
> one
> > > own contributions and that helps the project forward.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Pierre Smits
> > >
> > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> > > OFBiz based solutions & services
> > >
> > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
> > > slidingfilaments@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I find it exhausting that I cannot focus on coding in OFBiz because
> of
> > > the
> > > > "machine-gun" like activities, many of which are triggered by
> Jacques.
> > I
> > > am
> > > > spending more and more time trying to limit code getting into the
> > > framework
> > > > than actually doing critical things like refactoring and improving
> the
> > > code
> > > > base.
> > > >
> > > > Quality wins over quantity hands-down. We need to focus on quality,
> we
> > > need
> > > > to focus our limited resources and efforts on fewer but more critical
> > > > issues. It is really tiring to engage in these threads that go on
> > > > indefinitely many of which I find not that important anyway. For
> > example:
> > > >
> > > > - There were some long, long discussions on whether or not to add
> > Gradle
> > > > shortcut tasks. These tasks are minor and not that important in the
> > first
> > > > place. Why bloat the code early, this can always be visited once we
> > > finish
> > > > more critical work.
> > > > - We had discussions on "Style guides" when we have some very bad
> code
> > > that
> > > > needs to be cleaned first. Does it really matter if I say if(x==y) or
> > if
> > > > (x==y) when the bigger issues are unresolved like hidden mutable
> shared
> > > > state, no interfaces, poor design, poor documentation, faulty logic,
> > and
> > > > spaghetti code. Before focusing on style and spending a lot of energy
> > > > there, let's look at the much much bigger problem of poor quality and
> > > badly
> > > > designed code. (REF http://markmail.org/message/cpqfhxn6fnu5zuu7)
> > > > - There was another long discussion for example on semi colons in
> > Groovy
> > > > scripts. Again, is that the most important thing right now? I can see
> > > much
> > > > bigger problems in our groovy scripts than that. (REF
> > > > http://markmail.org/message/rabzquyotw3gf3vx)
> > > > - We had a long discussion on whether to make binary releases when we
> > > > didn't even release! (REF http://markmail.org/message/
> 7up63poazemvgha2
> > )
> > > > - The themes discussion is not that important, it is more important
> to
> > > > focus on the underlying technology. We have major problems in the way
> > > > themes are designed, web assets are fragmented between framework,
> apps
> > > and
> > > > themes, there is a lot of duplication, the widget system is not pure
> > and
> > > > mixed with a lot of templates. These problems are more pressing and
> if
> > > > resolved, makes the themes a smaller problem. (REF
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8293
> > > >
> > > > So I think the philosophy (Less is More) is very relevant in here. We
> > > need
> > > > less long exhausting threads and more focus on critical technical
> areas
> > > to
> > > > help improve the fundamentals of our project.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys
> > (perhaps
> > > > > within
> > > > > the PMC ml)?
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do
> > with
> > > > the
> > > > > topic discussed here, or on this thread
> > > > > (http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-
> > > > > monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-
> > tp4694738p4695235.html).
> > > > >
> > > > > Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't
> > broken
> > > > > within stock ofbiz.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> > > > > com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
> > > > > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
I won't ask such a thing of any contributor. Maybe you (or others) feel the
need to dictate how and when other volunteers spend their energy on the
itches they want/need to scratch.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
OFBiz based solutions & services
OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxsystems.com>
wrote:
> Is it a complicated thing to ask our most prolific contributor to slow down
> so that we can all be effectively involved? Personally I don't think it is
> complicated.
>
> On 25/09/2016 22:03, "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Everyone participating can be blamed for complaints, or needlessly
> > prolonging discussions. Some want to discuss everything, Some blame the
> > other contributor.
> >
> > Does the blame game help the project? Instead of pointing out the 'flaw'
> in
> > other, it is better to apply some introspection first wit respect to one
> > own contributions and that helps the project forward.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> > OFBiz based solutions & services
> >
> > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
> > slidingfilaments@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I find it exhausting that I cannot focus on coding in OFBiz because of
> > the
> > > "machine-gun" like activities, many of which are triggered by Jacques.
> I
> > am
> > > spending more and more time trying to limit code getting into the
> > framework
> > > than actually doing critical things like refactoring and improving the
> > code
> > > base.
> > >
> > > Quality wins over quantity hands-down. We need to focus on quality, we
> > need
> > > to focus our limited resources and efforts on fewer but more critical
> > > issues. It is really tiring to engage in these threads that go on
> > > indefinitely many of which I find not that important anyway. For
> example:
> > >
> > > - There were some long, long discussions on whether or not to add
> Gradle
> > > shortcut tasks. These tasks are minor and not that important in the
> first
> > > place. Why bloat the code early, this can always be visited once we
> > finish
> > > more critical work.
> > > - We had discussions on "Style guides" when we have some very bad code
> > that
> > > needs to be cleaned first. Does it really matter if I say if(x==y) or
> if
> > > (x==y) when the bigger issues are unresolved like hidden mutable shared
> > > state, no interfaces, poor design, poor documentation, faulty logic,
> and
> > > spaghetti code. Before focusing on style and spending a lot of energy
> > > there, let's look at the much much bigger problem of poor quality and
> > badly
> > > designed code. (REF http://markmail.org/message/cpqfhxn6fnu5zuu7)
> > > - There was another long discussion for example on semi colons in
> Groovy
> > > scripts. Again, is that the most important thing right now? I can see
> > much
> > > bigger problems in our groovy scripts than that. (REF
> > > http://markmail.org/message/rabzquyotw3gf3vx)
> > > - We had a long discussion on whether to make binary releases when we
> > > didn't even release! (REF http://markmail.org/message/7up63poazemvgha2
> )
> > > - The themes discussion is not that important, it is more important to
> > > focus on the underlying technology. We have major problems in the way
> > > themes are designed, web assets are fragmented between framework, apps
> > and
> > > themes, there is a lot of duplication, the widget system is not pure
> and
> > > mixed with a lot of templates. These problems are more pressing and if
> > > resolved, makes the themes a smaller problem. (REF
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8293
> > >
> > > So I think the philosophy (Less is More) is very relevant in here. We
> > need
> > > less long exhausting threads and more focus on critical technical areas
> > to
> > > help improve the fundamentals of our project.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys
> (perhaps
> > > > within
> > > > the PMC ml)?
> > > >
> > > > I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do
> with
> > > the
> > > > topic discussed here, or on this thread
> > > > (http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-
> > > > monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-
> tp4694738p4695235.html).
> > > >
> > > > Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't
> broken
> > > > within stock ofbiz.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> > > > com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
> > > > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
Is it a complicated thing to ask our most prolific contributor to slow down
so that we can all be effectively involved? Personally I don't think it is
complicated.
On 25/09/2016 22:03, "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Everyone participating can be blamed for complaints, or needlessly
> prolonging discussions. Some want to discuss everything, Some blame the
> other contributor.
>
> Does the blame game help the project? Instead of pointing out the 'flaw' in
> other, it is better to apply some introspection first wit respect to one
> own contributions and that helps the project forward.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
> slidingfilaments@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I find it exhausting that I cannot focus on coding in OFBiz because of
> the
> > "machine-gun" like activities, many of which are triggered by Jacques. I
> am
> > spending more and more time trying to limit code getting into the
> framework
> > than actually doing critical things like refactoring and improving the
> code
> > base.
> >
> > Quality wins over quantity hands-down. We need to focus on quality, we
> need
> > to focus our limited resources and efforts on fewer but more critical
> > issues. It is really tiring to engage in these threads that go on
> > indefinitely many of which I find not that important anyway. For example:
> >
> > - There were some long, long discussions on whether or not to add Gradle
> > shortcut tasks. These tasks are minor and not that important in the first
> > place. Why bloat the code early, this can always be visited once we
> finish
> > more critical work.
> > - We had discussions on "Style guides" when we have some very bad code
> that
> > needs to be cleaned first. Does it really matter if I say if(x==y) or if
> > (x==y) when the bigger issues are unresolved like hidden mutable shared
> > state, no interfaces, poor design, poor documentation, faulty logic, and
> > spaghetti code. Before focusing on style and spending a lot of energy
> > there, let's look at the much much bigger problem of poor quality and
> badly
> > designed code. (REF http://markmail.org/message/cpqfhxn6fnu5zuu7)
> > - There was another long discussion for example on semi colons in Groovy
> > scripts. Again, is that the most important thing right now? I can see
> much
> > bigger problems in our groovy scripts than that. (REF
> > http://markmail.org/message/rabzquyotw3gf3vx)
> > - We had a long discussion on whether to make binary releases when we
> > didn't even release! (REF http://markmail.org/message/7up63poazemvgha2)
> > - The themes discussion is not that important, it is more important to
> > focus on the underlying technology. We have major problems in the way
> > themes are designed, web assets are fragmented between framework, apps
> and
> > themes, there is a lot of duplication, the widget system is not pure and
> > mixed with a lot of templates. These problems are more pressing and if
> > resolved, makes the themes a smaller problem. (REF
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8293
> >
> > So I think the philosophy (Less is More) is very relevant in here. We
> need
> > less long exhausting threads and more focus on critical technical areas
> to
> > help improve the fundamentals of our project.
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys (perhaps
> > > within
> > > the PMC ml)?
> > >
> > > I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do with
> > the
> > > topic discussed here, or on this thread
> > > (http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-
> > > monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-tp4694738p4695235.html).
> > >
> > > Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't broken
> > > within stock ofbiz.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> > > com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
> > > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
Everyone participating can be blamed for complaints, or needlessly
prolonging discussions. Some want to discuss everything, Some blame the
other contributor.
Does the blame game help the project? Instead of pointing out the 'flaw' in
other, it is better to apply some introspection first wit respect to one
own contributions and that helps the project forward.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>
OFBiz based solutions & services
OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
slidingfilaments@gmail.com> wrote:
> I find it exhausting that I cannot focus on coding in OFBiz because of the
> "machine-gun" like activities, many of which are triggered by Jacques. I am
> spending more and more time trying to limit code getting into the framework
> than actually doing critical things like refactoring and improving the code
> base.
>
> Quality wins over quantity hands-down. We need to focus on quality, we need
> to focus our limited resources and efforts on fewer but more critical
> issues. It is really tiring to engage in these threads that go on
> indefinitely many of which I find not that important anyway. For example:
>
> - There were some long, long discussions on whether or not to add Gradle
> shortcut tasks. These tasks are minor and not that important in the first
> place. Why bloat the code early, this can always be visited once we finish
> more critical work.
> - We had discussions on "Style guides" when we have some very bad code that
> needs to be cleaned first. Does it really matter if I say if(x==y) or if
> (x==y) when the bigger issues are unresolved like hidden mutable shared
> state, no interfaces, poor design, poor documentation, faulty logic, and
> spaghetti code. Before focusing on style and spending a lot of energy
> there, let's look at the much much bigger problem of poor quality and badly
> designed code. (REF http://markmail.org/message/cpqfhxn6fnu5zuu7)
> - There was another long discussion for example on semi colons in Groovy
> scripts. Again, is that the most important thing right now? I can see much
> bigger problems in our groovy scripts than that. (REF
> http://markmail.org/message/rabzquyotw3gf3vx)
> - We had a long discussion on whether to make binary releases when we
> didn't even release! (REF http://markmail.org/message/7up63poazemvgha2)
> - The themes discussion is not that important, it is more important to
> focus on the underlying technology. We have major problems in the way
> themes are designed, web assets are fragmented between framework, apps and
> themes, there is a lot of duplication, the widget system is not pure and
> mixed with a lot of templates. These problems are more pressing and if
> resolved, makes the themes a smaller problem. (REF
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8293
>
> So I think the philosophy (Less is More) is very relevant in here. We need
> less long exhausting threads and more focus on critical technical areas to
> help improve the fundamentals of our project.
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com> wrote:
>
> > Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys (perhaps
> > within
> > the PMC ml)?
> >
> > I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do with
> the
> > topic discussed here, or on this thread
> > (http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-
> > monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-tp4694738p4695235.html).
> >
> > Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't broken
> > within stock ofbiz.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> > com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
> > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>.
I find it exhausting that I cannot focus on coding in OFBiz because of the
"machine-gun" like activities, many of which are triggered by Jacques. I am
spending more and more time trying to limit code getting into the framework
than actually doing critical things like refactoring and improving the code
base.
Quality wins over quantity hands-down. We need to focus on quality, we need
to focus our limited resources and efforts on fewer but more critical
issues. It is really tiring to engage in these threads that go on
indefinitely many of which I find not that important anyway. For example:
- There were some long, long discussions on whether or not to add Gradle
shortcut tasks. These tasks are minor and not that important in the first
place. Why bloat the code early, this can always be visited once we finish
more critical work.
- We had discussions on "Style guides" when we have some very bad code that
needs to be cleaned first. Does it really matter if I say if(x==y) or if
(x==y) when the bigger issues are unresolved like hidden mutable shared
state, no interfaces, poor design, poor documentation, faulty logic, and
spaghetti code. Before focusing on style and spending a lot of energy
there, let's look at the much much bigger problem of poor quality and badly
designed code. (REF http://markmail.org/message/cpqfhxn6fnu5zuu7)
- There was another long discussion for example on semi colons in Groovy
scripts. Again, is that the most important thing right now? I can see much
bigger problems in our groovy scripts than that. (REF
http://markmail.org/message/rabzquyotw3gf3vx)
- We had a long discussion on whether to make binary releases when we
didn't even release! (REF http://markmail.org/message/7up63poazemvgha2)
- The themes discussion is not that important, it is more important to
focus on the underlying technology. We have major problems in the way
themes are designed, web assets are fragmented between framework, apps and
themes, there is a lot of duplication, the widget system is not pure and
mixed with a lot of templates. These problems are more pressing and if
resolved, makes the themes a smaller problem. (REF
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-8293
So I think the philosophy (Less is More) is very relevant in here. We need
less long exhausting threads and more focus on critical technical areas to
help improve the fundamentals of our project.
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com> wrote:
> Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys (perhaps
> within
> the PMC ml)?
>
> I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do with the
> topic discussed here, or on this thread
> (http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-
> monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-tp4694738p4695235.html).
>
> Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't broken
> within stock ofbiz.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Scott Gray <sc...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
Hi Paul,
In the thread you linked to, Jacques made some strong statements of what he
thought about the fact he hadn't received a response. I felt it was a good
opportunity to point out just how many responses he asks the community to
provide. It wasn't intended as an an attack, simply a request to take
pause. I'm not sure why Jacques opted to start two new discussions based on
what I said.
The PMC mailing list definitely isn't appropriate for this discussion.
Typically it's only reserved for committer/PMC membership votes, trademark
issues and other similarly sensitivite topics. Disagreement amongst PMC
members should be aired in public as any other contributor disagreements
would be.
Regards
Scott
On 25/09/2016 21:41, "Paul Piper" <pp...@ilscipio.com> wrote:
> Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys (perhaps
> within
> the PMC ml)?
>
> I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do with the
> topic discussed here, or on this thread
> (http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-
> monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-tp4694738p4695235.html).
>
> Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't broken
> within stock ofbiz.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.
> com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Paul Piper <pp...@ilscipio.com>.
Aren't these meant to be private discussions between you guys (perhaps within
the PMC ml)?
I don't understand how Jacques' activity level has anything to do with the
topic discussed here, or on this thread
(http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Wiki-page-for-the-monthly-Jira-issues-list-creation-in-the-blog-tp4694738p4695235.html).
Oh and -1 on flatgrey as it is one of the few themes that aren't broken
within stock ofbiz.
--
View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Put-the-Flatgrey-theme-in-Attic-tp4695129p4695240.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OFBiz specific rules on lazy consensus [was Re: [VOTE] Put the
Flatgrey theme in Attic]
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
I disagree that there is a need to define a "rule" in this case.
Rules are useful to govern a series of recurrent and similar behaviors from
several different individuals. Here this rule would be an attempt to govern
the consequences of the behavior of a single person.
In this case, the solution for you, as Scott as very well articulated,
would be to slow down and try to avoid engaging other community members in
long discussions.
Jacopo
On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
> If people see a possible issue or are in doubt with a proposition, I
> propose they quickly put a -1 as they would put a +1 on the contrary.
> It would not a be vote, but then we would know that there is a kind of
> disagreement, but not yet time to explain it clearly.
> And we would know we need to wait a bit more than normally and especially
> ask the persons who are concerned why they are.
> Then we would wait their answers in a reasonable delay. By convention this
> would be 3 days.
>
> I propose this rule to be written in a set of OFBiz specific rules which
> AFAIK are still to be written.
> So this would be the first and we would create a prominent wiki page for
> that.
>
> I think that by written OFBiz specific rules in a wiki page it will
> clarify the situations in most cases. We would of course add new OFBiz
> specific rules when a new case would be crossed.
>
> What do you think? Of course, here again lazy consensus apply
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#LazyConsensus but you might
> already use the proposition above...
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 24/09/2016 à 23:39, Scott Gray a écrit :
>
>> - I think you rely on lazy consensus too much. Not many contributors have
>> as much time as you to give to the project and formulating an argument
>> against something (and then continuing the discussion) can take up a lot
>> of
>> time and energy. In my experience people are generally very quick to
>> agree
>> to good ideas (because it takes no effort other than to reply +1) so if
>> you
>> get*no* responses then you should IMO take pause before pushing ahead.
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>
>