Thanks, Jukka. What I find interesting is that most of the posts in the first thread are after the vote had already closed here and it seems apparent they weren't even aware the vote had taken place. From what I read there was a single initial comment expressing discomfort about the proposal that was answered with "At this point we're still in a period of community building and performing enough discovery to form a detailed plan. As such precise decisions about what will be in the first Bloodhound release are yet to be made." which was responded to with "Cool. Looking forward to seeing the detailed plan."
As I read it the ambivalence then seemed to be a wait and see about what the detailed plan was to be. I'm having trouble reconciling the answer in [4] since the only thing it could be based on was that bit of discussion and what happened in private, from which it is clear to me that they believed a plan was going to be proposed before anything was going to happen, especially in light of the later comments. Even in the private discussion with the few that were involved there apparently was misunderstanding as they said they expected more of a git-fork rather than a community fork. That is hard to understand though, since all along they knew the proposal was to come to the ASF. There is quite a bit of history in there about private discussions. Nothing seems to have been discussed in public with Trac until Dec 2, almost simultaneously with the proposal here. So far, there has only been a single response to [2]. I've not come to any conclusion myself on this but at the moment I'm still uncomfortable. Ralph On Jan 1, 2012, at 3:34 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Hyrum K Wright > <hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com> wrote: >> The Incubator proposal was publicized and discussed on trac-dev >> *simultaneously* with the discussion on general@incubator, and the >> reception was generally indifferent (as Greg mentioned earlier) > > To add some pointers to this, the trac-dev discussion thread is at > [1]. A related vote was just called at [2]. > > The question about the fork status was also brought up [3] on general@ > during discussion, and was IMHO answered pretty well [4]. > > Obviously the fear of this being "seen as a hostile fork" did become > reality at least for some, so I guess there's a lesson here for us > all. > > [1] https://groups.google.com/d/topic/trac-dev/FCaDVcbh1JQ/discussion > [2] https://groups.google.com/d/topic/trac-dev/kMVFq9pkfus/discussion > [3] http://markmail.org/message/w5efz3m2ihs7gmbw > [4] http://markmail.org/message/3ylvwqjmqqvvh3sf > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >
