You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@poi.apache.org by Glen Stampoultzis <gs...@iinet.net.au> on 2003/07/30 01:53:34 UTC
Re: cvs commit:
jakarta-poi/src/documentation/content/xdocs/trans book.xml
guidelines.xml index.xml
Rainer, I agree.
Although I preferred Poi I feel it's much more important to be
consistent. A simple vote would have cleared this whole point up and we
would no longer be having this conversation. Vetoing the making of this
decision was not cool and reflects an unwillingness on Andy's part to let
go of his baby.
-- Glen
At 07:02 AM 30/07/2003, you wrote:
> >It is not appropriate to go through the docs and change one to another,
> >however we have not indeed voted to change from the convention that both are
> >acceptable. Spelling it Poi on new Doc's that are created is ATM
> >acceptable.
>
>This is a typical purely technical attitude. What do you think why
>Microsoft is so successful? Because of its superior quality products? Look
>and there marketing and learn! Do you think they don't care whether they
>spell it "Windows", "WINDOWS" or "wInDoWs"?
>
>
> >It REALLY bugs me that this issue is achieving greater importance than our
> >next release.
>
>Believe me, it is at least equally important. That "POI" or "Poi" spelling
>makes at least a sloppy impression. Impression counts. Would you rely your
>enterprise-critical application on a sloppy product. But wait, no, POI
>isn't a product: It does not even have a brand!
>
>
>Best regards
>Rainer ("out of town 'till Thursday") Klute
>
> Rainer Klute IT-Consulting GmbH
> Dipl.-Inform.
> Rainer Klute E-Mail: klute@rainer-klute.de
> Körner Grund 24 Telefon: +49 172 2324824
>D-44143 Dortmund Telefax: +49 231 5349423
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: poi-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: poi-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Glen Stampoultzis
gstamp@iinet.net.au
http://members.iinet.net.au/~gstamp/glen/
Re: cvs commit:
jakarta-poi/src/documentation/content/xdocs/trans book.xml guidelines.xml
index.xml
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
On 7/29/03 9:17 PM, "Tetsuya Kitahata" <te...@apache.org> wrote:
> Glen, Rainer,
>
> To tell the truth, I also agree with this point.
>
> Especially, this line:
>
>> Vetoing the making of this decision was not cool
>
That doesn't matter. I do not consent. YOU DO NOT GET TO CHANGE THE APACHE
VOTING RULES!!!! There is no discussion on this! If you don't like the
voting rules go talk to the board. I've PASTED YOU THE LINK. Show me WHERE
it says "Product changes are by Majority" in fact it says EXACTLY the
opposite. ONE guy's veto makes difference.
>
> Also, from my point of view, Andy's "veto" declaration was
> not cool.
> I declared, "this vote will be passed if the average of the
> votes will be greater than 0.5".. It meant, "This vote
> will not be passed even two(+1) and one(-1) .. at least we need
> three(+1) and less than one(-1)". And, vise versa.
> I thought, "this vote will not be passed, I know.
> But, there were no *conversation* (involve all the committers)
> about this issue before, it seems.
> The *process* will be precious rather than the *result*."
>
YOU DO NOT GET TO MAKE THE VOTING RULES! Tetsuya I'm really upset with both
you and Glen right now. I'm mostly upset with you because of suppositions
like this. When do you suppose the project was named? Why...2+ years ago.
How many committers were there? 2. Me and Marc Johnson. There was a
conversation, we didn't vote because it predated Apache and votes with two
people are just silly. However had there been a vote, it would have been
unanimous because Marc REALLY liked the name.
Now WHERE did you get the idea there was not a conversation? YOU pulled
this idea out of the air. Its insulting, its WRONG and I'm really feeling
attacked here.
> Andy's declaration was a bit against the community process, it seems.
> (I am very sad to say, however ...)
>
No your vote, your deciding YOUR OWN voting rules was totally against the
Apache community process. Remember the process protects the minority as
much as the majority. The issue is "Do we change the spelling to Poi" the
answer was -1 from me (and Rainer, et al). Its a product change so YOU must
get CONSENSUS. NOT MAJORITY.
I didn't make this Rule, APACHE DID. PLEASE read the voting rules before
proposing any more votes. YOU DO NOT get to decide the method of voting.
> There might be one more choice:
> 1. Product name: Jakarta Poi
> 2. Project name: Jakarta POI
>
No there is a third. Leave things the way they are. You're creating a vote
that is actually addressing two issues: "Adopt a naming convention" and
then what it should be. By not allowing us to vote against the first,
you're making a decision for us. This is a *consensus* based process which
means that little pedantic issues like spelling tend to be divisive which is
why I asked nicely several times "PLEASE STOP THIS" and well we're now going
on over a week discussing this.
You'll notice that all of the early decisions reflect a certain pragmatism
which said "We'll never agree on this so 'either is fine'". I bet Rainer
would like a policy which said everything was done POI versus Poi. So he'd
effect a policy and it would be based on his preference. I vote: LIVE and
LET LIVE. Why? Because these long running threads about something SILLY
don't have to happen. We can all get along and work together and be happy
by just avoiding pedantic discussions just like this one.
> -- Tetsuya (tetsuya@apache.org)
>
> P.S. Rather, is it better to be emphasized?
> "Why was there no vote on the fork of 3.0?"
>
Hey guess what Tetsuya:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=poi-dev&m=105101098201136&w=2
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=poi-dev&m=105714993000768&w=2
I proposed it. Glen did it. No one disagreed. Whether we should have
called a vote, perhaps, it might have been considered something up to the
release manager and subject to lazy consensus. Now what we forgot to vote
on was the most recent release. My apologies to Rainer for that. I
basically just forgot because I didn't have much time to do the release and
Glen wasn't able to do it except for a limited amount of time.
Tetsuya, for someone who is relatively new to the project, has contributed
relatively little...do you think you should be stirring up this much
division this early into your committership?
-Andy
> --
>
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:53:34 +1000
> Glen Stampoultzis <gs...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>>
>> Rainer, I agree.
>>
>> Although I preferred Poi I feel it's much more important to be
>> consistent. A simple vote would have cleared this whole point up and we
>> would no longer be having this conversation. Vetoing the making of this
>> decision was not cool and reflects an unwillingness on Andy's part to let
>> go of his baby.
>>
>> -- Glen
>>
>> At 07:02 AM 30/07/2003, you wrote:
>>>> It is not appropriate to go through the docs and change one to another,
>>>> however we have not indeed voted to change from the convention that both
>>>> are
>>>> acceptable. Spelling it Poi on new Doc's that are created is ATM
>>>> acceptable.
>>>
>>> This is a typical purely technical attitude. What do you think why
>>> Microsoft is so successful? Because of its superior quality products? Look
>>> and there marketing and learn! Do you think they don't care whether they
>>> spell it "Windows", "WINDOWS" or "wInDoWs"?
>>>
>>>
>>>> It REALLY bugs me that this issue is achieving greater importance than our
>>>> next release.
>>>
>>> Believe me, it is at least equally important. That "POI" or "Poi" spelling
>>> makes at least a sloppy impression. Impression counts. Would you rely your
>>> enterprise-critical application on a sloppy product. But wait, no, POI
>>> isn't a product: It does not even have a brand!
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Rainer ("out of town 'till Thursday") Klute
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: poi-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: poi-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
--
Andrew C. Oliver
http://www.superlinksoftware.com/poi.jsp
Custom enhancements and Commercial Implementation for Jakarta POI
http://jakarta.apache.org/poi
For Java and Excel, Got POI?
Re: cvs commit: jakarta-poi/src/documentation/content/xdocs/trans book.xml guidelines.xml index.xml
Posted by Tetsuya Kitahata <te...@apache.org>.
Glen, Rainer,
To tell the truth, I also agree with this point.
Especially, this line:
> Vetoing the making of this decision was not cool
--
My preference (opinion) is "Poi" rather than "POI".
Because
1. This project used this "POI" as acronym and the market knows
the *fact*.
2. Making all letters capitalized means "acronym". See the other
jakarta subprojects. (BSF,BCEL,ECS,ORO,...)
3. From marketing point of view, I am [+1] to "Poi", to wipe out
the dark image in the past.
--
Also, from my point of view, Andy's "veto" declaration was
not cool.
I declared, "this vote will be passed if the average of the
votes will be greater than 0.5".. It meant, "This vote
will not be passed even two(+1) and one(-1) .. at least we need
three(+1) and less than one(-1)". And, vise versa.
I thought, "this vote will not be passed, I know.
But, there were no *conversation* (involve all the committers)
about this issue before, it seems.
The *process* will be precious rather than the *result*."
Andy's declaration was a bit against the community process, it seems.
(I am very sad to say, however ...)
There might be one more choice:
1. Product name: Jakarta Poi
2. Project name: Jakarta POI
-- Tetsuya (tetsuya@apache.org)
P.S. Rather, is it better to be emphasized?
"Why was there no vote on the fork of 3.0?"
--
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:53:34 +1000
Glen Stampoultzis <gs...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> Rainer, I agree.
>
> Although I preferred Poi I feel it's much more important to be
> consistent. A simple vote would have cleared this whole point up and we
> would no longer be having this conversation. Vetoing the making of this
> decision was not cool and reflects an unwillingness on Andy's part to let
> go of his baby.
>
> -- Glen
>
> At 07:02 AM 30/07/2003, you wrote:
> > >It is not appropriate to go through the docs and change one to another,
> > >however we have not indeed voted to change from the convention that both are
> > >acceptable. Spelling it Poi on new Doc's that are created is ATM
> > >acceptable.
> >
> >This is a typical purely technical attitude. What do you think why
> >Microsoft is so successful? Because of its superior quality products? Look
> >and there marketing and learn! Do you think they don't care whether they
> >spell it "Windows", "WINDOWS" or "wInDoWs"?
> >
> >
> > >It REALLY bugs me that this issue is achieving greater importance than our
> > >next release.
> >
> >Believe me, it is at least equally important. That "POI" or "Poi" spelling
> >makes at least a sloppy impression. Impression counts. Would you rely your
> >enterprise-critical application on a sloppy product. But wait, no, POI
> >isn't a product: It does not even have a brand!
> >
> >
> >Best regards
> >Rainer ("out of town 'till Thursday") Klute