On Oct 23, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Leo Simons wrote:
Change the subject line when you change the subject...done.
But you didn't change the subject, so that was a bad idea.
On Oct 21, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:24 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
This is *not* an actual vote. The vote is on harmony-dev; see
Well, then, why did you call it a vote?
You know, that *was* explained in the parts of the e-mail you
snipped, if briefly.
Yeah, yeah, I know that part -- I snipped it because I am tired of the
long, very annoying, pissing and moaning process that seems to require
a larger quantity of email instead of simply doing the easy things that
I (and others) have suggested.
This is what we call confusing the voters, ballot irregularities,
"hanging chad", and other fun things that cause unnecessary wars.
Hmm. I find this particular decision to hold a vote somewhere else
from standard somewhat annoying (but understand the rationale),
agree it is a confusing (lots of intelligent people around,
hopefully they'll get what's going on), see irregularity but not
with the ballot itself, have no idea what "hanging chad" means, and
I don't understand how any of this is funny at this point. Being a
pacifist, I certainly agree all wars are unnecessary.
The point is: Harmony would have graduated last week if you had simply
done a public vote on harmony-dev followed by a public vote on general
at incubator. That's all there is to it. ALL OTHER COMMUNICATION
beyond
those simple two tasks are totally unnecessary and caused simply because
the mentors are not doing what everyone else expects of a podling.
I don't understand why the mentors are making this process so hard.
It is clear by now that you don't understand or disagree with some
of the decisions harmony's mentors have made or things they have
done. I think I've made a big attempt at making a hard process
(given the amount of e-mail the incubator regularly gets about its
complex processes, I wouldn't say its easy) as easy as possible, so
this comment frustrates me a lot, Roy. I hope you can qualify it so
I may learn. Further down is a detailed POV with some specific
questions on this.
It is easy if you do it the way I did it for Jackrabbit. It would have
been even easier for Harmony given the number of PMC members involved.
How can I qualify it any better than that -- you had the votes already,
and this interminable DISCUSSION-WITHOUT-VOTING is just costing votes.
At no time whatsoever during this entire discussion was it ever
possible for Harmony to have failed a graduation vote given the
number of PMC members who are involved in the project, yet you seem
bound and determined to attract as many -1s as possible by dicking
around with a fairly easy procedure.
<joke type="bad">Oh yeah, I'm very determined to attract -1s. As
much as possible. The way the "-" can sometimes hug the "1" if you
have the right font...so much prettier than girls...</joke>
Seriously, can we please stick to civil language, and not attribute
motivation that's so obviously, well, a misattribution?
That was a sarcastic view of your actions so far. Allow me to
demonstrate ...
Just have the project vote on graduation FIRST
Once again, that has happened, on harmony-private (yes, I
complained about the vote being private. Like a broken record). It
says so in the first line of the first e-mail on this subject:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/
200610.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
QED. You do know my opinion on voting in private, right? You do
realize
this is a public decision that must be made by the project, not by the
mentors or any individuals who happen to reside on the private list,
right?
So, you should understand that holding an important project discussion
on the private mailing list, let alone a vote, is more than sufficient
justification for everyone here to vote -1 on graduation. Right?
Why isn't that clear? It is absolutely forbidden for any Apache project
to manage the project from a private list, with special exceptions
given for voting on personnel and non-disclosure security items.
I reminded people of that when I changed the list names by including
the full text of the board resolution. Everyone on the list is
responsible
for preventing its misuse and, if need be, request removal of the
private
list if the participants can't use it correctly. When someone
misdirects a
public discussion to a private list, the only appropriate response is
to end that discussion and move it public. If they don't obey,
terminate the project.
Again, each reply I have received so far has made me less and less
inclined to vote for graduation of Harmony. I had no reason to believe
there was anything wrong with the project until this discussion started,
and the project itself seems to be behaving correctly, but this whole
graduation discussion is just one fatal mistake after another.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
