Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com>]

Do we want to list out who's responsible for components on the wiki?
It seems like ththis would encourage having people send email directly
an individual committer rather than the MyFaces community.

Once things are checked into the repository, we should all be
collectively responsible for the code.   There are going to be people
who have a lot more invested into a component, but does that require a
tracking page?    SVN logs will show who has been committing changes
to a particular component.

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at>]

Ok, since the feedback was mostly negative and one -1 voting and no +1s
I removed the maintainers but kept the kategorization,
I really need the cats for future testing purposes.
Also the feedback on the idea of categorizing the components
was positive:

http://wiki.apache.org/myfaces/ComponentCategorization

is the new page.


Werner


Bruno Aranda schrieb:
> Good points in this thread. Yes, the list of components is ok, but
> names should be removed right away. Even without putting the name
> elsewhere (apart from being the author of those classes) you still get
> personal mails about that classes/component. Let's delete the names,
> then... and maybe, instead of having a new classification, we could
> put the information in the existing component pages (e.g. uses dojo,
> ...)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bruno
> 
> On 8/21/06, Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I don't think anyone will disagree to a wiki page that shows the
>> organization of the components. So +1 for that.
>>
>> Also I agree with;
>>
>>
>> > We are all corporately responsible for all of the code, and have
>> freedom
>> to get involved with any of it.
>>
>>
>> So -1 for stating committer names as the maintainer of each component.
>>
> 
> 
> 
>> Cagatay
>>
>> p.s. I'm really getting used to the +1, -1 business :)
>>
>>
>> On 8/21/06, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>> > Ok valid points are risen, that it is not Apache like...
>> > I think a vote on whether we keep the page or not
>> > might be good...
>> > as I said, I wanted to achieve a different purpose
>> > for this, namely to have categorized which
>> > components are dojoized, so that I have it easier
>> > to test after dojo upgrades (hence also
>> > the current maintainers of the components)
>> > but Craig and the others have risen a valid point.
>> > Lets either vote on this, or just do it the wiki
>> > way and remove yourself if you feel out of place
>> > in there.
>> > All I really need is some sort of component categorization
>> > so that I can keep track of things...
>> > I did not want to open a Pandoras box here.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
> 

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Bruno Aranda <br...@gmail.com>]

Good points in this thread. Yes, the list of components is ok, but
names should be removed right away. Even without putting the name
elsewhere (apart from being the author of those classes) you still get
personal mails about that classes/component. Let's delete the names,
then... and maybe, instead of having a new classification, we could
put the information in the existing component pages (e.g. uses dojo,
...)

Cheers,

Bruno

On 8/21/06, Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think anyone will disagree to a wiki page that shows the
> organization of the components. So +1 for that.
>
> Also I agree with;
>
>
> > We are all corporately responsible for all of the code, and have freedom
> to get involved with any of it.
>
>
> So -1 for stating committer names as the maintainer of each component.
>



> Cagatay
>
> p.s. I'm really getting used to the +1, -1 business :)
>
>
> On 8/21/06, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
> > Ok valid points are risen, that it is not Apache like...
> > I think a vote on whether we keep the page or not
> > might be good...
> > as I said, I wanted to achieve a different purpose
> > for this, namely to have categorized which
> > components are dojoized, so that I have it easier
> > to test after dojo upgrades (hence also
> > the current maintainers of the components)
> > but Craig and the others have risen a valid point.
> > Lets either vote on this, or just do it the wiki
> > way and remove yourself if you feel out of place
> > in there.
> > All I really need is some sort of component categorization
> > so that I can keep track of things...
> > I did not want to open a Pandoras box here.
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Cagatay Civici <ca...@gmail.com>]

I don't think anyone will disagree to a wiki page that shows the
organization of the components. So +1 for that.

Also I agree with;

We are all corporately responsible for all of the code, and have freedom to
> get involved with any of it.


So -1 for stating committer names as the maintainer of each component.

Cagatay

p.s. I'm really getting used to the +1, -1 business :)

On 8/21/06, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>
> Ok valid points are risen, that it is not Apache like...
> I think a vote on whether we keep the page or not
> might be good...
> as I said, I wanted to achieve a different purpose
> for this, namely to have categorized which
> components are dojoized, so that I have it easier
> to test after dojo upgrades (hence also
> the current maintainers of the components)
> but Craig and the others have risen a valid point.
> Lets either vote on this, or just do it the wiki
> way and remove yourself if you feel out of place
> in there.
> All I really need is some sort of component categorization
> so that I can keep track of things...
> I did not want to open a Pandoras box here.
>
>

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Mario Ivankovits <ma...@ops.co.at>]

Ok, Mike told me that I was wrong to move this discussion to pmc@ and I
should repost it at dev@.

Now, I dont want to rewarm this discussion, but when I reread my own
post I think there are still valid points within.
So - here we go:

On 8/22/06, Mario Ivankovits <ma...@ops.co.at> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Moved to private@ ...
>
> > Also not really Apache, so why just
> > discussed stuff during a beer, or more ...
> I think the problem is, that our projects are getting more and more
> complex. And its not just a "deprecate this or that component", its the
> system as whole.
> Now what we see - I cant speak for apache at all, but at least for a
> project which itself is more a umbrella than a single focused project -
> is, that people tend to concentrate on their work only.
> As a developer in a mid range company like me I'd say this is perfectly
> reasonable, we have so much work to do outside of apache that it is hard
> to keep up to date with the project. Often more than not I have to spend
> my after work time to do some apache work, enhancements of fixing bugs.
>
> I do not think that adding our names to the wiki page will increase the
> number of private mails, but it will help us to be up to date with the
> interests of a developer. Something we have in jakarta commons
> (http://wiki.apache.org/jakarta-commons/CommonsPeople), there we are
> also "responsible for the commons code", but it is also clear that e.g.
> I am not the best commons-math developer due to the lack of knowledge in
> this area.
> That way we can react early if a component get dormant.
If ComponentMaintainer sounds too harsh we could find another name for
sure, maybe DeveloperInterests and have the same wordings like on the
commons page.

>
> As I see currently, tomahawk is more a umbrella for different kind of
> things than a component library only. Maybe splitting this project might
> help so that we can decrease the scope of responsibility (SoR ;-) ) for
> every single developer. Where and what to split can be discussed later.
>
> Also I do not like the wording "responsibility". Responsible against
> whom, the other developers, the users, ....
> Well, I take my responsibility seriously, but I don't wanted to be
> forced to be responsible for anything - especially not for the whole
> project.
> Thats why I think a ComponentMaintainers page fits well. There we can
> express what responsibility we would like to have currently.
> But notice, I just mean the responsibility to fix bugs in a specific
> area.
> As a committer especially if you are on the pmc you are still
> responsible for the way the project should go. This kind of
> responsibility is often just participating in discussions or +1/-1 to a
> vote. It's not that much work than setup a test environment, dig into
> the code and fix a bug.
>
> For example: If there are some problems during the release process, the
> release manager still should post to the dev mailing list, but maybe
> then with "Hey Mario! In your ConversationTag ... bla bla bla". If I do
> not answer within two or three (e.g. due to vacation) days its still
> enough room for others to jump in and fix the problem. But ... If you
> look at the release process in the past you'll see that the number of
> developers helping out in such situations do not nearly match with the
> number of committers we have.
>
> Another example: Fixing stuff in the "view serialization stuff" is hard.
> This code is not that easy to read and follow. (This is no valuation of
> the code itself) Now, if we see there is no maintainer for this piece of
> code (no name in ComponentMaintainer) we have to find another one. This
> can be done by posting to the dev list "volunteer needed for ....".
> Hopefully another committer will jump up.
> It is more than demotivating if you have problems (e.g. again during the
> release process) and you try to find a developer to fix something but
> none is responding.
>
> Just an idea, maybe unconventional, but hey ...
> Said that, I do not consist on the existence of this wiki page. I just
> thought it will be helpful for us, but if you don't like it, lets remove
> the names :-)
Ok, this already happened ;-)
>
> Ciao,
> Mario
>
>

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

I mean Mario and me talked about a thing like
"fix 2 bugs a month". Also not really Apache, so why just
discussed stuff during a beer, or more ...

:)

On 8/21/06, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
> Ok valid points are risen, that it is not Apache like...
> I think a vote on whether we keep the page or not
> might be good...
> as I said, I wanted to achieve a different purpose
> for this, namely to have categorized which
> components are dojoized, so that I have it easier
> to test after dojo upgrades (hence also
> the current maintainers of the components)
> but Craig and the others have risen a valid point.
> Lets either vote on this, or just do it the wiki
> way and remove yourself if you feel out of place
> in there.
> All I really need is some sort of component categorization
> so that I can keep track of things...
> I did not want to open a Pandoras box here.
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at>]

Ok valid points are risen, that it is not Apache like...
I think a vote on whether we keep the page or not
might be good...
as I said, I wanted to achieve a different purpose
for this, namely to have categorized which
components are dojoized, so that I have it easier
to test after dojo upgrades (hence also
the current maintainers of the components)
but Craig and the others have risen a valid point.
Lets either vote on this, or just do it the wiki
way and remove yourself if you feel out of place
in there.
All I really need is some sort of component categorization
so that I can keep track of things...
I did not want to open a Pandoras box here.

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>]

On 8/21/06, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>
> Jurgen Lust schrieb:
> > Op ma, 21-08-2006 te 11:14 -0400, schreef Mike Kienenberger:
> >> Do we want to list out who's responsible for components on the wiki?
> >> It seems like ththis would encourage having people send email directly
> >> an individual committer rather than the MyFaces community.
> >
> > Hmm, good point.
> >> Once things are checked into the repository, we should all be
> >> collectively responsible for the code.   There are going to be people
> >> who have a lot more invested into a component, but does that require a
> >> tracking page?    SVN logs will show who has been committing changes
> >> to a particular component.
> >
> > Personally I favour the way they do things at Gentoo Linux: instead of
> > everyone being collectively responsible for the code, they have divided
> > their committer community into groups, each with a project lead. For
> > example, they have a Java group, an Apache group, etc.
> >
> > Jurgen
> >
> >
> Actually I just started the page to document which components
> are dojoized and which are not,
> the maintainers are not really mandatory on this,
> it just makes things easier...
> I like the idea with the groups btw...


In every large open source project, it's natural that certain developers
tend to focus on certain parts of the code.  However, assigning "formal"
ownership or responsibility -- or even implying that there is such a thing
-- is not the way Apache projects work.  We are all corporately responsible
for all of the code, and have freedom to get involved with any of it.

Need to coordinate, or ask who might be affected by a change you want to
make?  That's what the dev list is for.

Craig

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at>]

Jurgen Lust schrieb:
> Op ma, 21-08-2006 te 11:14 -0400, schreef Mike Kienenberger:
>> Do we want to list out who's responsible for components on the wiki?
>> It seems like ththis would encourage having people send email directly
>> an individual committer rather than the MyFaces community.
> 
> Hmm, good point.
>> Once things are checked into the repository, we should all be
>> collectively responsible for the code.   There are going to be people
>> who have a lot more invested into a component, but does that require a
>> tracking page?    SVN logs will show who has been committing changes
>> to a particular component.
> 
> Personally I favour the way they do things at Gentoo Linux: instead of
> everyone being collectively responsible for the code, they have divided
> their committer community into groups, each with a project lead. For
> example, they have a Java group, an Apache group, etc.
> 
> Jurgen
> 
> 
Actually I just started the page to document which components
are dojoized and which are not,
the maintainers are not really mandatory on this,
it just makes things easier...
I like the idea with the groups btw...

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Jurgen Lust <Ju...@gmail.com>]

Op ma, 21-08-2006 te 11:14 -0400, schreef Mike Kienenberger:
> Do we want to list out who's responsible for components on the wiki?
> It seems like ththis would encourage having people send email directly
> an individual committer rather than the MyFaces community.

Hmm, good point.
> 
> Once things are checked into the repository, we should all be
> collectively responsible for the code.   There are going to be people
> who have a lot more invested into a component, but does that require a
> tracking page?    SVN logs will show who has been committing changes
> to a particular component.

Personally I favour the way they do things at Gentoo Linux: instead of
everyone being collectively responsible for the code, they have divided
their committer community into groups, each with a project lead. For
example, they have a Java group, an Apache group, etc.

Jurgen

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

Oh boy,

I belive that. I bet you also get lot's of stuff on Jakarta Commons.
:) and Struts ;)

On 8/21/06, Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/21/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > I get lot's of direct emails, I think Mike is right, that this can (or
> > will) increase the number of offline emails.
>
>
> You'd be amazed at how many personal Tomcat questions I still get, after not
> having worked on that project for several years, simply because my name is
> listed as an author on one of the developer guides :-).
>
> Craig
>
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Craig McClanahan <cr...@apache.org>]

On 8/21/06, Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> I get lot's of direct emails, I think Mike is right, that this can (or
> will) increase the number of offline emails.


You'd be amazed at how many personal Tomcat questions I still get, after not
having worked on that project for several years, simply because my name is
listed as an author on one of the developer guides :-).

Craig

Re: Myfaces Wiki "ComponentMaintainers"

[Matthias Wessendorf <ma...@apache.org>]

On 8/21/06, Mike Kienenberger <mk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do we want to list out who's responsible for components on the wiki?
> It seems like ththis would encourage having people send email directly
> an individual committer rather than the MyFaces community.

I agree with Mike,
I saw the page this morning and was also not really thrilled with having that.

I get lot's of direct emails, I think Mike is right, that this can (or
will) increase the number of offline emails.

So -1 on a wiki page like that).

-Matthias

> Once things are checked into the repository, we should all be
> collectively responsible for the code.   There are going to be people
> who have a lot more invested into a component, but does that require a
> tracking page?    SVN logs will show who has been committing changes
> to a particular component.
>


-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com