As noted elsewhere: the vote question was a mixture of 'what do you think'
(consensus -> majority vote) and 'is it ok' (technical -> unanimous vote).
I'd also be in favour to do the generic parts in Geronimo and only do the
integration in TomEE. So yes, in a consensus vote I'd also vote -1. If this is
interpreted as commit vote then I vote -0
The work is the same and as long as it's been done I'm fine either ways. Now
that we did all the 3 weeks of rambling and discussions let's focus on the
important stuff.
Where is the code? Who did already work on it? Or do we again have 30 people
discussing but just 2 working? ;)
LieGrue,strub
On Wednesday, 4 April 2018, 01:14:57 CEST, David Blevins
<david.blev...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2018, at 2:16 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> It was more as a "if im always the only one seeing tomee differently i can
> leave to let you space". Not as a threat.
That's a generous sentiment. Either way the best outcome is that you stay and
we all learn the lesson that disagreeing is ok and healthy. How is the most
important part.
Disagreement can be an incredibly productive and innovative thing if done
right. By definition, that means this project is sitting on some incredible
innovative potential.
A concrete way I think we can measure ourselves is by the number of people who
feel comfortable voting. I would consider a vote of 20 people that included 3
-1 votes to be significantly more healthy than a vote of 3 people and all +1s.
> [...]
> There is no veto at apache if you check rules closely. All is more about
> respect and overall consensus IIRC.
I want to be careful that we don't learn a false lesson as Apache does have
technical vetos. These are more meant for line-of-code level input vs
community direction.
The intention of the two votes was to make the line a little more clear.
- The first vote "Merge Pull Request 123 - MicroProfile JWT support" was
intended to flush out line-of-code level technical issues with the PR: breaks
the build; doesn't follow code style; introduces security issues. It's
ultimately a Review-than-Commit vote and a -1 should be viewed as a technical
veto.
- The second vote "Explore creating a reusable JWT Library" was intended to
determine overall desire on what the next step should be. No commit being
reviewed, more of a community level discussion. A -1 should not be viewed as a
veto.
-David
