On Jul 8, 2014, at 4:13 PM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
> Hi Chip, > > Chip Childers wrote: >> Let me try that again, this time with content! >> >> I've dropped private@, since this doesn't belong there. >> >> On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Rohit Yadav<rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> Daan Hoogland wrote: >>>> I do not see why the PMC should drive defining the >>>> standard. This is something that should be carried and cherished by >>>> all developers. >>> >>> In my experience when something is everyone's responsibility, eventually >>> no one is responsible for it. >>> >>> I think the PMC should drive it because IMHO the PMC comprises of our >>> project management folks who have decision making powers and are >>> officially responsible for the project as recognized by the ASF [1]. >>> >>> Therefore, I'm requesting our PMC to come up with a convention along >>> with committers/developers on this issue and enforce it using some >>> tooling etc. >>> >>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.htm >> >> Everyone here is part of the community, and everyone deserves a say in >> how this is done. If you're suggesting that PMC members should be >> involved in this discussion, agreed! But should should committers and >> contributors! > > Thanks Chip -- I'm with you on this. > > I'm trying to say is -- shared responsibility is tricky, in most cases > no one would be responsible eventually, *unless*… > That's really a bar discussion :). At Apache we govern by consensus. Any technical decisions (especially one like this), needs to be agreed upon by the community as a whole. The agreement will happen through discussion on the dev list. For us to change, we need people (who believe that what we are doing currently is wrong) to step up, explain the issues and make a proposal. Then by iterating and discussing the proposal we will reach consensus. At least that's how I view things. I re-opened the thread because no-one picked it up, and as you say it's a shame. IMHO our development methodology is totally broken and this is best shown by our inability to release on-time. I am interested to take on the 4.5 or 4.6 RM duties if we agree to change our workflow significantly. Personally, I would like to freeze master and make the development happen somewhere else. Basically master should be our releasable branch and once we merge things in master we end up with working releases. I would go further and actually propose that only the RM gets to merge in master. I think if we started from a working release tag it would mean that we would never miss a release on time. Only the scope of the features would be affected. Until we have a proper review/test/commit CI setup we should not allow committing to master. I am still thinking through this, but once I have a clear idea, I plan to make a proposal by writing a new workflow on the wiki. ideas, thoughts, flames ? -sebastien > Regards, > Rohit Yadav > Software Architect, ShapeBlue > M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com > Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//> > CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/> > CloudStack Consulting<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/> > CloudStack Infrastructure > Support<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/> > CloudStack Bootcamp Training > Courses<http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/> > > This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the > intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon > its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you > believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company > incorporated in England & Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company > incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. > Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is > operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered > trademark.
