> I think as long as we all believe we're all good faith actors, truly believe
> we all want what's best for the project (even if we don't necessarily all
> agree on what that is all the time), and internalize that nobody wants to see
> a monoculture on the project, we'll be fine.
I realised re
Thanks Jeff - I have an initial rough draft of basically exactly what
you've enumerated above from starting to formally ramp back up last week
I'll tidy up and try to get out here Monday.
And thanks everyone for the discussion. This is Hard Stuff; a huge part of
the Apache Way (at least on our pro
Back to the original question in the thread - I think a critical pass through
open issues is warranted -
What hasn’t been triaged?
What is slated for 4.0 but unassigned ?
What is patch available but needs more engineering ?
What is ready to commit and uncommitted?
You’ve got the context to under
I don't think there was anything wrong with the linked thread.
On 11/01/2020, 18:19, "Sankalp Kohli" wrote:
Words are open to interpretation but I do not see anyone telling anyone
anything but proposing it in this and other thread. AFAIK, people who tell even
accidentally don’t start a di
Words are open to interpretation but I do not see anyone telling anyone
anything but proposing it in this and other thread. AFAIK, people who tell even
accidentally don’t start a discussion thread or ask for feedback before they do
things.
The thread on video calls was a discussion and no one o
I've tried to make my concerns as clear as possible: there's a difference
between proposing and telling.
People who have de-facto power (through the resources they control) are able to
_tell_ other people that things are a certain way. They may easily do it
accidentally. So they must be espec
The Agenda is public and everyone will contribute to it. Anyone can attend the
meeting. Anyone can propose an alternate time. How is it private ?
What else do you suggest ?
> On Jan 11, 2020, at 9:31 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith
> wrote:
>
> I think everyone is missing my point, and the reas
I think everyone is missing my point, and the reason for it. I am super
focused on not repeating the situation that happened before. So I am super
keen that everyone is focused on doing everything as properly as possible.
Telling the community: we've privately decided this important community
Here is the mail thread where we discussed this. It also has agreement that
we will discuss things on mailing list and no decision till it happens on
mailing list. Hope this clears things up when you read the thread.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/aa54420a43671c00392978f2b0920bc6926ca9ba1e61
I recall this being discussed at ApacheCon, and I recall the idea seemed very
much for a semi-formal regular project meeting, in which project business would
be discussed on a pre-agreed agenda. Some ground rules were even suggested at
ApacheCon, such as ensuring the meetings occur in rotating
We discussed about the video call on the dev list and everyone agreed to it.
I also welcome Josh in helping with the project. Like Josh and Dinesh
mentioned, let’s encourage contributions by allowing non-committers to do first
round of review as I don’t see a downside of doing this. These video
This will be rambling as I’m typing on my phone while watching The Office and
I’m not going to proofread, but:
PMC votes on releases, and code policies, and trademarks, and things of that
nature. While the link suggests PMCs *can* sponsor meetings, nothing should
preclude anyone from meeting to
-%20Product%20and%20Release%20Management%20in%20Apache%20Cassandra.pdf
Cheers,
– Scott
From: Benedict Elliott Smith
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2020 6:05 PM
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: Offering some project management services
To be clear,
To be clear, as it seems like I'm being very negative here, I'm really pleased
to see DataStax suddenly increase their participation, even if currently it's
limited to administrative activities. But let's try really hard to do things
in the right way.
https://www.apache.org/foundation/governan
Isn’t doing such things the way people who are not writing code become part of
a project? By offering their time to do things that benefit the project?
Why does anyone “with a formal role” need to agree that Patrick is allowed to
use his time to try and get some people together to discuss contr
This is also great. But it's a bit of a weird look to have two people, neither
of whom have formal roles on the project, making decisions like this without
the involvement of the community. I'm sure everyone will be supportive, but it
would help to democratise the decision-making.
On 11/01/
Scott and I had a talk this week and we are starting the contributor
meetings on 1/22 as we talked about at NGCC. (Yeah that was back in
September) Stay tuned for the details and agenda in the project confluence
page.
Patrick
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 3:21 PM Jeff Jirsa wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2
If I gave the impression I was advocating for just plopping tickets on
people as assignees that was a significant miscommunication on my part.
My mental model is to go back to the Jirsa approach of a pulsed status
update with a list of open unassigned tickets and call for volunteers on
the dev lis
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 3:19 PM Jeff Jirsa wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 2:35 PM Benedict Elliott Smith <
> bened...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, I also miss those fortnightly (or monthly) summaries that Jeff
>> used to do. They were very useful "glue" in the community. I imagine th
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 2:35 PM Benedict Elliott Smith
wrote:
>
> Yes, I also miss those fortnightly (or monthly) summaries that Jeff
> used to do. They were very useful "glue" in the community. I imagine they'd
> also make writing the board report easier.
>
> +1, those were great
>
>
>
I'll
Yes, I also miss those fortnightly (or monthly) summaries that Jeff used to
do. They were very useful "glue" in the community. I imagine they'd also make
writing the board report easier.
+1, those were great
-
To uns
> Isn’t this the point of project management; to avoid this issue?
Is the point of project management to avoid the problems caused by project
management? That feels like a Dilbert cartoon.
To be clear, I'm simply responding to the apparent suggestion that we assign
every 4.0 ticket to somebod
Just to be clear, I welcome Josh's help with project management.
Dinesh
> On Jan 10, 2020, at 12:53 PM, Dinesh Joshi wrote:
>
> My 2¢.
>
> We need more folks reviewing tickets and providing feedback and testing the
> submitted patches. There are many low complexity patches out there that are
My 2¢.
We need more folks reviewing tickets and providing feedback and testing the
submitted patches. There are many low complexity patches out there that are in
need of reviews. Any help in that direction is appreciated. Even if they aren't
familiar with the part of codebase, a first review gi
I also find that assigning tickets to people when they have no bandwidth to
implement them is counterproductive.
Isn’t this the point of project management; to avoid this issue?
Lets say there are 10 blocking tickets for 4.0, and they are all on you; a
PM could help by finding others who could h
> One thing I'd love to see
> again is a regular (every two weeks?) update on progress on the dev list
> (similar to what Jeff Jirsa used to send around -- it also included a call
> for reviews iirc).
Yes, I also miss those fortnightly (or monthly) summaries that Jeff used to do.
They were ve
> I can only speak to my experience on this and other software projects, but I
> find a lot of things slip through the cracks by virtue of not having
> ownership for various points in their pipeline or stall based on people not
> realizing things are on their plate.
I also find that assigning t
Extra time contributed to the project by an experienced community member in
either developer or project management areas would be very helpful in
completing 4.0. Thanks for volunteering Josh -- and +1 on thanking Scott
for his existing efforts (and Benedict and others who worked to improve the
JIRA
>
> developer time from your employer would probably be more impactful
Certainly, and there's movement on that side as well but that's
independent from my current purview so I don't feel it appropriate for me
to speak to that.
the project has already largely agreed on the work that is necessar
I personally welcome your increased participation in any role, and more focus
on project delivery is certainly a great thing. But developer time from your
employer would probably be more impactful, as the main active contributors
right now have their own project management infrastructure, and a
Hey all,
I've recently had some cycles free up I can dedicate to the open-source
project. My intuition is that I can add the most value right now by
engaging in some simple project management type work (help get assignees
and reviewers for things critical path for 4.0, help stimulate and
facilitat
31 matches
Mail list logo
