Dmitriy has pointed to me why there's a incorrect perception of me going after Raul ;) I haven't even noticed the last sentence of the original email. And I am sorry about sending the email too fast. What I was trying to do is to make a trivial statement: there's a mistake that needs to be fixed - let's do just that and move on.
Cos On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 03:00AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Thank you you for confirming my point: there was a mistake and it needs to be > corrected. End of story. But instead of simply fixing it and moving on, we are > spending hours x 50 people on reading and writing long emails arguing about > imaginary semantical differences. > > There's no need to be emotional about who said what: I deserve the benefits of > the doubt as well despite being a "former mentor of the project" whatever the > hell it means. I am not dismissing the value of your contributions to this > community: I welcome and appreciate your efforts! Neither have I targeted you > nor put your on the stand - you did it to yourself. If you don't like > something you think I addressed to you - send me a private email and explain > that I was a jerk and hurt your feelings: no need to make a public display of > potential nothingness. Would I choose to listen to it or not - is a separate > matter altogether: I have the same right to not read or accept something that > another person has wrote. > > Let's move on. Best, > Cos > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 01:16AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > > There has been no negligence, Cos! People are human and make mistakes. End > > of the story. > > > > Bringing such negative verbiage to the community helps in nothing. > > Everybody is doing their best, I'd like to think so. > > > > In fact, you have shifted the conversation away from the actual topic at > > hand. So thanks. > > > > A suggestion: "Benefit of the doubt" is a powerful practice and keeps us > > away from errors in judgement. > > > > With regards your list of questions, may I ask you to re-read your initial > > message. Don't make me explain what's obvious, mate. > > > > Cheers. > > On 28 Sep 2015 23:41, "Konstantin Boudnik" <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hmm... > > > > > > Negligence, n. : the trait of neglecting responsibilities and lacking > > > concern > > > syn : omission, oversight > > > > > > Doesn't sound catastrophic in my vocabulary, really. Does this > > > > case of negligence and needs to be addressed accordingly. > > > translate to "should face a firing squad without a trial of his peers"? > > > Have I anywhere pointed a finger at you or anyone else? Or attacked > > > someone? Why are you all upset and defensive about it? > > > > > > Cos > > > > > > On September 28, 2015 7:39:51 AM PDT, Raul Kripalani <ra...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > >Cos, your language seems too harsh for the situation. > > > > > > > >No one here is committing negligence. The explanation is simple: people > > > >aren't perfect. > > > > > > > >Now, let's take a step back and see the big picture. Around 95% of the > > > >commits in this project are by GridGain personnel (check git shortlog > > > >-s > > > >-n) who have spent months/years working on this codebase during their > > > >daily > > > >job. Their eyes are accustomed to this code style and naturally they'll > > > >spot oddities in a twitch. It's obvious. > > > > > > > >For newer people, we don't even have checkstyle nor decent facilities > > > >for > > > >newer people to spot formatting issues quickly. Because, surprise! The > > > >issues that Yakov spotted are simply of formatting. The code is > > > >functional > > > >and much better tested than other streamers and IP Finders. Other > > > >streamers > > > >have 1 test, this streamer has 9 unit tests! Look at the code. > > > >Furthermore, > > > >Yakov seems to have made a mistake reading the Git commit history. > > > >There > > > >were never WIP commits on master. > > > > > > > >So may I ask you to stop using catastrophic vocabulary. The situation > > > >is > > > >not catastrophic, it's simply improvable. > > > > > > > >Now, as an ASF member, I ask you to recognise that unaffiliated > > > >volunteers > > > >like me bring diversity to the project that's otherwise dominated by a > > > >company. You should appreciate that – more so given that you're a > > > >former > > > >mentor. I do this for the fun, and attacks like yours take the fun out > > > >of > > > >it. Have a look again at this project's team composition and, for those > > > >people not affiliated to GridGain, try to find when their last commit > > > >was... Then you'll see what I mean. > > > > > > > >P.S.: I did not merge the ZK IP Finder myself and I'm assuming that > > > >Valentin will want to comment. > > > > > > > >Regards, > > > > > > > >*Raúl Kripalani* > > > >PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data > > > >and > > > >Messaging Engineer > > > >http://about.me/raulkripalani | > > > >http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani > > > >http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk > > > > > > > >On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > >> Are these official guidelines that are worked-out and communicated by > > > >> community? Basically, were they made clear when the project went on > > > >the CTR > > > >> model? I presume it is/was looking at the wikipage. Hence > > > >non-sticking > > > >> to them is a case of negligence and needs to be addressed > > > >accordingly. > > > >> > > > >> I would also want to highlight the other side of such negligence: by > > > >> dumping > > > >> semi-baked code to the master one creates a burden for the rest of > > > >the > > > >> community as the code degrades in quality, potentially breaks tests, > > > >style > > > >> checks, etc. And someone else needs to deal with it to unblock her's > > > >future > > > >> progress. And that's brings forward another point that Brane and I > > > >were > > > >> making on a few occasions: in the CTR communities you need to invite > > > >in > > > >> people > > > >> with great deal of attention to how they work with others. Are they > > > >> respecting > > > >> others' time and effort? Are they good citizens of the community? And > > > >on, > > > >> and > > > >> on. > > > >> > > > >> Another purely technically matter: master isn't a trash can. Master > > > >should > > > >> be > > > >> close to releasable at any given point of time. WIP stuff doesn't > > > >belong to > > > >> master, that's what the dev and integration branches are for. > > > >> > > > >> Cos > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:31PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: > > > >> > Guys, > > > >> > > > > >> > I have just reviewed the code and have some comments. 1-2 are very > > > >> serious > > > >> > from my point of view. > > > >> > > > > >> > 1. Code is in master. Did anyone checked tests on TC? Moreover, are > > > >there > > > >> > suites for those tests? > > > >> > 2. It seems that work on streamer has been done directly in master. > > > >I see > > > >> > WIP commits, but I think I should not. As agreed finished work > > > >should be > > > >> > committed as a single set of changes. > > > >> > 3. I see unused variable > > > >> > - org.apache.ignite.stream.mqtt.MqttStreamer#cachedLogPrefix > > > >> > 4. Unused import - import com.google.common.base.Joiner; > > > >> > 5. Code and javadocs lines exceed 120 chars restriction. > > > >> > 6. Plenty of javadocs issues - absence, multiline "inheritdoc", > > > >etc. > > > >> > 7. Spacing is not correct - in ignite codebase logical blocks are > > > >> separated > > > >> > with blank line. > > > >> > 8. There should always be a blank line at the end of each file. > > > >> > 9. retrier vs retryier issue. > > > >> > > > > >> > Who is in charge for this code? Raul, Val? Can anyone fix my > > > >comments? > > > >> > > > > >> > I would also ask everyone (even committers) not to commit to master > > > >> without > > > >> > doing review with another committer. > > > >> > > > > >> > Here is the link to Ignite's coding guidelines - > > > >> > > > > >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines. > > > >> Feel > > > >> > free to suggest and discuss edits if anything does not seem valid > > > >to you. > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks! > > > >> > > > > >> > --Yakov > > > >> > > >
