Thanks Shane. I agree we (the PMC) should have stepped in well before things got to this point. Hindsight is 20/20, and, I'm still learning here too ;)
Then we could have prevented such extreme non-Apache behavior (invalid vetos, reverting wars). Mike http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Shane Curcuru <[email protected]> wrote: > Michael McCandless <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...snip... >> >> While I agree, out of context, Robert's use of a veto/revert wars is >> inappropriate, and is not how things should be done in a healthy >> Apache project.... Lucene/Solr are not healthy right now, and >> desperate times call for desperate measures. > > Apache projects are about community and consensus driven development. When > the larger community is having serious disagreements about the direction of > the project, the first place the community (people here) should go is to the > PMC - that'd be private@lucene in this case. > > PMCs *should* be the place to work these kinds of issues out. If committers > start engaging in controversial reverts, the community should *insist* that > the PMC assist in the matter and help show the community-based way forwards. > > If committers on any Apache project aren't getting answers or help from > their PMC, then you can always raise the issue up to board@. Remember: > we're all volunteers here: it does take time for PMCs or communities to > really understand the issue and respond to it (even if there isn't > consensus). So I certainly wouldn't urge people to email board@ with every > little issue without letting the PMC discuss it. > > But from a board perspective, we would certainly rather have heard of some > of the apparent community issues in Solr and Lucene recently from a PMC > member or committer *first*, before one of the directors was reading through > some of these threads or JIRA comments this week. The board welcomes > reports on community health from our projects - good or bad. > > - Shane (not on Lucene lists) >
