On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:25PM, Greg Stein wrote: > On Jul 29, 2015 11:37 AM, "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > On 29.07.2015 18:14, Joe Brockmeier wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015, at 03:19 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > > >> Personally I'm not too happy with how this community tracks issues, but > > >> hey, if it works for them, why fix it? It'll be a fine day when the > IPMC > > >> starts telling podlings how their development workflow should look > like. > > > Does "works for them" translate into "people not currently in the > > > community can follow how the existing community tracks issues, so they > > > can contribute and become part of the community"? If so, then maybe it's > > > OK. If it's not transparent to folks not currently part of that > > > community, it's hard to see how the community will sustain itself with > > > new members as other folks inevitably move on to other projects. > > > > Given that new contributors keep showing up on a regular basis, I have > > to assume that it's not so opaque as all that. > > > > Anyway, Ignite has been discussing and implementing a revised (and IMO > > better) set of policies for Jira use and git workflow since this > > discussion started; other than displaying an incomprehensible preference > > for RTC, it seems to be going well. > > I always translate RTC as "we don't trust you, so somebody else must > approve anything you do." > > To me, that is a lousy basis for creating a community. Trust and peer > respect should be the basis, which implies CTR. I have seen many excuses > for RTC, but they all are just window dressing over mistrust.
While I tend to agree with you, it worth noting that there's a whole bunch of TLPs sticking to RTC. So, this data point doesn't reflect on the podling in question. Cos --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
