David,

I am sorry, but I am not ok and I do *not* agree all is well.  I think my
emails have been pretty clear on that.  You have not answered the questions
on how this initial PMC list was chosen.

Jeff


David Blevins wrote:
> 
> This is a good note.  I have just one comment on this part.
> 
>> That's where I think we focused too much on coding rather
>> than on establishing a healthy community.
> 
> We're doing great in this regard.  We've gotten several compliments  
> that we have focused on the right things and have done very well at  
> creating a great community.  They all came from non-committers too  
> who were happy with how much they felt welcomed included.  They all  
> sited it as the primary reason they wanted to participate more.
> 
> 
> I think we'll be in great shape if we continue to focus on our core  
> values that everyone's input matters, that you don't need commit to  
> be in the community, have a voice, or truly be included.
> 
> I think though that if we focus too much on the PMC topic, the net  
> result will be that people will feel that it's a much bigger deal  
> than it really is, that there is some injustice going on, that things  
> really aren't equal and their input doesn't matter as much as we say,  
> that even having commit isn't good enough, and that the PMC really  
> *is* the center of the project and not them nor even the committers.
> 
> The good news is that we're not there yet :)  Rick has stated he's  
> fine with our direction.  Matt now feels good and added his +1.  Jeff  
> seems to also agree all is well.  Usually a -1 creates more  
> negativity.  But I think it's also a sign of our strength that we can  
> talk through things and turn them positive.  And all the while we've  
> had this discussion on our public dev list instead of a private list.
> 
> We're in great shape, we just need to keep working together to keep  
> things this way.
> 
> 
> -David
> 
> 
> On Apr 3, 2007, at 11:44 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> 
>> On 4/4/07, Jeff Genender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Ok...so now I am confused.  From what I read, I see that as well.   
>>> But
>>> IIUC, the PPMC has somewhat disbanded less a "vote" on new
>>> members...again...am I missing something?
>>
>> I've been looking for some additional information on the PPMC and PMC,
>> but couldn't find any reference that would back up the statement of
>> forming PMC from the former PPMC. It simply does make sense. So, let
>> me think about the situation out loud.
>>
>> In our case, with Jeff, Matt, Rick who're with OpenEJB for a long time
>> and they're not on PPMC, it might mean that 1) PPMC has completely
>> forgotten to vote to invite them to PPMC, 2) PPMC has decided they are
>> not ready to be invited to PPMC yet.
>>
>> Either case doesn't sound good. It's us, the PPMC, who should've taken
>> an active role in taking care of people who did't fall into these
>> categories. That's where I think we focused too much on coding rather
>> than on establishing a healthy community. Well, it doesn't mean that
>> we don't have one, we do, but again - pointing out the names, Mohammad
>> and Manu were active enough, to be visible and by their activities
>> influenced the final decision about their invitation to become the
>> committers. Perhaps, if I'd spend more time on the project, I'd have
>> noticed it, but I think current activities around the project always
>> boiled down to my activity in discussions with no care of others less
>> involved in development activities who helped us, but might've felt
>> being excluded only because they're not actively coding. Shame on me!
>>
>> As you can see, I've got many doubts and lots of troubles figuring out
>> what road we should follow. Given that I feel that it was simply an
>> oversight and I should've stepped forward to discuss the issue
>> beforehand, I'd go ahead and...likely make a mistake that would
>> outlive the project - there would always be bad feelings about the
>> initial committers. On the other hand, if we stayed here and wait till
>> the situation is sorted out in the Incubator, how would that change
>> from the situation we'd graduate and do it later? Let's be honest,
>> what if PPMC didn't think they're ready for PPMC? Should that hinder
>> our graduation? These questions surely pop up in our heads and if it
>> happened in this project, it might completely grind down what we've
>> achieved so far.
>>
>> Hmm, I think I've got too much thinking about it and would appreciate
>> the others' comment on it. I don't like when people are unhappy so I'm
>> all ears to hear anything I should/could do to turn it around.
>>
>> (Oh how I wish Jeff had pointed it out before)
>>
>> Jacek
>>
>> -- 
>> Jacek Laskowski
>> http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/-vote--Request-Graduation-to-a-TLP-tf3509720s2756.html#a9835860
Sent from the OpenEJB Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to