james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Brewin" <sbre...@synsys.com>
Subject RE: Next 2.x release
Date Tue, 07 Nov 2006 21:46:10 GMT
Danny Angus wrote:

Can we not just give Danny's idea a try? We really need to find a way to cut
out all of this noise.

Quite honestly, I can't be arsed to wade though threads to determine who
said what to who and when.

I don't care whether its the status file or a wiki page (which should only
editable by committers). I do care that we have a clear and visible
direction recorded that has been decided by committer votes.

I hate to think of the time people have wasted in these and similar
discussions that might more productively have been spent in moving James
forward. Its true that to move forward we need a consensus on goals. Once
achieved, we use the status file to publish them.

It really shouldn't be this painful.



> On 11/7/06, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
> > Don't know what others think, but I have a few workflow
> problems working
> > on the STATUS file (I would prefer, for example, a wiki page).
> > I would like to hear what other committers think about
> this, as I would
> > not like to be the only one updating it: I'm not the owner
> of any open
> > branch, but I just updated it to include some of them.
> It is a matter of having a controlled record of what decisions we've
> made, people who are driving out decisions will have more record
> keeping to do, thats just life I'm afraid. And updating the STATUS
> file isn't really much more difficult than updating a wiki page or
> sending an email.
> >
> > I personally don't need a status file because I spend
> already so much
> > time on this project that it is more probable I forgot my
> name than the
> > status of the project, and I currently feel I'm updating it to make
> > Danny happy...
> No, you should be doing it to record the fact that *other people* have
> endorsed what you are doing, This is a collaboration and it is
> important to record our consensus, especially important to people in
> your position who might be accused of doing too much too quickly
> without the support of the group. The STATUS file is there to back you
> up.
> > I really have problems deciding what to write there and what to not
> > write there. I would write there every message I wrote in
> the "roadmaps"
> > threads but this would make it unreadable... so I don't
> write much...
> No, just key facts, what version, when. If you *want to* you can add
> *short* descriptions of what is planned for the versions, and record
> VOTES which people might question. You're finding that it is hard to
> keep reminding people that they have agreed to something. The STATUS
> file should help stop that.
> > That said I will update it when you'll write "this should be in the
> > status file" ;-) . And maybe you can do this for a while so I learn.
> I hope you will learn that it can benefit you by being your sword and
> shield as well ;-)
> And if it really doesn't help us with some of this stuff, well we can
> stop using it again.
> d.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message