> On Mar 29, 2018, at 10:06 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Le 30 mars 2018 04:30, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > >> On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:57 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 12:15 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>> >>> Le 29 mars 2018 20:49, "David Blevins" <david.blev...@gmail.com> a écrit > : >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 8:53 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mar 28, 2018, at 6:29 PM, David Blevins <david.blev...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> Is your -1 on the basis that the code must be moved to Geronimo? >>>> >>>> That + the fact tomee is not and shouldnt become a put it all project > just >>>> become of scm perms IMO but stay an integration project to keep sense > and >>>> not mess up its own image and mess up the quality of our reusable libs. >>> >>>> Do you see this as a one-time situation or do you intend to vote the > same >>>> way on any future MicroProfile implementation work in TomEE? >>>> >>>> For example, should work be started to implement MicroProfile > OpenTracing >>>> in TomEE, would that PR be -1 on the basis the implementation should be > in >>>> Geronimo? >>> >>> Being said it will be in G anyway since that is half of G definition > since >>> some months now (since server has been dropped), I ll do my best to keep > it >>> consistent in our small ecosystem and do the same to have strong reusable >>> libs since there is no technical blockers @MP to have it and a strong >>> integration solution (tomee) and not a mess with an in between state. >> >> I'm reading that as a yes that you would -1 future MP implementation work > in TomEE on the basis it should live in Geronimo, but you hope it doesn't > come to that and will do your best to create good implementations in > Geronimo so it isn't necessary. >> >> If I misunderstood, please clarify. > >> On Mar 29, 2018, at 1:49 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Globally that is it. You explained a lot why geronimo failed and not sure >> why tomee is kind of taking the same path - well actually cause of "perms >> lack" fear from what I read. This is not a safe reason (+not that relevant >> @asf thanks to the meritocracy) and Id prefer to keep "us" being unite as >> we have been 7 years ago instead of just going on different paths cause of >> a fears. > > > I think we should openly discuss your perspective and how it might be > > perceived by the project. There are 11 +1 votes, 5 of them binding. It > > does appear that overall the project would like to move forward with the > > code. You -1 the code on the basis that it should go to Geronimo instead > > with the clear statement you will continue to -1 on future MicroProfile > > code. Can you see how this creates a situation where 11 people feel they > > have no ability to contribute to the project now or in the future? Do you > > feel this is the spirit of the Apache Way and represents community over > > code? > > > More than never but I just dont ignore other projects. I understand most of > voting people are not involved in G and therefore I can see where they come > from (and no Jon, this was not directed to you in particular). > > The main difference is Im thinking of communities and not community.
I think it would be fair to assume everyone is thinking of communities plural and that no one is ignoring the greater good of Apache. Only that there are differences in opinion on what that is and how it should be achieved. > You are also plain wrong saying there is no way to contribute, there are > plenty as on any asf projects and for most people it will be the exact same. > > Project is created @G, if T duplicates it what does happen? We get an half > baked flavor on one side and another one on the other? Do you think it is > the right thing for asf David? Do you want to split communities? Do you > want to make of TomEE a put it all project which means getting rid of TomEE > as a thing? We need to acknowledge that the community voted on where to continue working on the code and that vote was overwhelmingly to continue evolving it here. The perspective of "TomEE is duplicating Geronimo" is a bit skewed as you created that repo in Geronimo during this vote. One could question if that is healthy behavior, but ultimately it's ok. Per ASF rules, duplication is absolutely ok, not a bad thing and business as usual. You feel it is bad and are entitled to that opinion, but I don't see you acknowledging your role in actively creating this duplication you don't like. There is also no code in the Geronimo repo you created, so if duplication is a concern it can be avoided. It stands to reason that for you where the code lives, Geronimo, is the most important thing and if that means duplication, that's a sacrifice you're willing to make. Again, this is an absolutely fine perspective and ok by Apache rules. People should be allowed to work where they want. > Im really fed up to be always felt as the bad guy but I also know it is > wrong and will fail. Short terms it will fake some activity on the project > (is it the goal?) Which can be good, long terms it will kill all the good > of TomEE AND our libraries as mentionned earlier. > > If you want to pass it in force you can but please remive me from the pmc > before. You are not the bad guy and it would be terrible to see you step down from the PMC. I would not support you being removed and would actively address any movement in that direction. I don't think we as a community grow by removing people. My definition of success is coming through this with you still strong, not the bad guy, but also that everyone feels they have the ability to keep moving forward even if you disagree. That this is business as usual and disagreement is ok, even encouraged. As PMC chair I feel it is my responsibility to protect your and everyone's ability to disagree, but make sure it is healthy and voices are both used and heard. If anyone feels like the bad guy, I'm doing a terrible job. If anyone feels like their voice doesn't matter, I'm doing a terrible job. You have a strong voice and that is an asset for the project. I don't think the solution is for your voice to get weaker, but for other voices to get a bit stronger. I think it's a common mistake to focus too much on the voices that talk, and not enough on the ones that don't. As I tend to say, "the only people who don't break the build are the ones who do nothing." As for leaving the PMC, I'd request you don't. I think that teaches others that disagreeing with you has consequences and will make them less likely to feel comfortable disagreeing with you in any form. We need to get to a place where disagreement is encouraged in a healthy way and discussion around disagreement is encouraged, not punished. When people feel it is safe to be wrong, they contribute more and earlier in the creative process. What I do feel I need to clarify with the board is if a technical veto can be issued on the basis that the code should exist exclusively in another project. A technical veto is usually meant to be accompanied by something that can be fixed so the code can potentially move forward. In this situation it's been clarified there is nothing that could be done to make the code acceptable here, moreover the code is in fact desirable and should live in Geronimo. This seems to say there's nothing technically wrong with the code and this is a community based -1. That's also ok, but if it is about community direction likely the majority vote should carry, not the minority. -David
