On Jan 16, 2008 12:19 AM, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So why not start a thread about who's planning / intending / feeling
> [morally] obligated / promising to support the product and help apply
> patches, and get an answer to you real question?
* http://www.nabble.com/-S2--Patch-a
Meanwhile, Ted has been busy applying patches. Thanks, Ted! It's
rewarding to see one's suggestions/contributions applied!
-Dale
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jan 15, 2008 1:48 AM, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's the underlying problem: We have over fifty outstanding patches.
> We have had over fifty outstanding patches for months nows. As a PMC
> member, I would like to know who intends to be available to help apply
> patches in 2008.
On Tue, January 15, 2008 10:25 am, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
> Everything except the "obligation" is fine for me. Probably "promise"
> could
> be fine :-)
I wonder if there's a way to codify a pinky-swear :) LOL
> Antonio
Frank
---
2008/1/15, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> One debatable point: there would be a subtle difference between saying "a
> +1 vote implies *intention* to support the release" versus saying "a +1
> vote implies *willingness* to support the release". Especially if you
> might be talking about
On Tue, January 15, 2008 5:04 am, Ted Husted wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2008 5:00 AM, Antonio Petrelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> What about replacing the term "obligation" with "intention"?
>
> +1 -- The voter's "intention" was the original point, and the most we
> could ever ask.
+1 here as well
: Re: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on a release imply that the vote
intends to help support the release?
On Jan 15, 2008 4:04 AM, Antonio Petrelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
We are not obliged to work on Struts, we can go away at any time, and we
have not deadlines. So, the *forced obl
+1 to that.
- Original Message -
From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Developers List"
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on a release imply that the vote
intends to help support the release?
On Jan
2008/1/15, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Here's the underlying problem: We have over fifty outstanding patches.
> We have had over fifty outstanding patches for months nows. As a PMC
> member, I would like to know who intends to be available to help apply
> patches in 2008. Not "fix" bugs, but
On Jan 15, 2008 5:00 AM, Antonio Petrelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about replacing the term "obligation" with "intention"?
+1 -- The voter's "intention" was the original point, and the most we
could ever ask.
-
To unsubs
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Sorry I don't understand, because English is not my mother tongue.
> Please
> > elaborate it.
> >
>
> From what you said the only way you know if a release will be supported is
> if you are helping to support it, so from that you should only be voting
From: "Antonio Petrelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Following your argument, if you only +1 releases which are going to be
supported, yet you don't know if any release will be supported, surely
you
can only +1 releases you are willing to support?
Sorry
On Jan 15, 2008 4:04 AM, Antonio Petrelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We are not obliged to work on Struts, we can go away at any time, and we
> have not deadlines. So, the *forced obligation* of support seems like a
> nonsense to me.
Please note that the original post cites the top-level ASF
doc
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Following your argument, if you only +1 releases which are going to be
> supported, yet you don't know if any release will be supported, surely you
> can only +1 releases you are willing to support?
Sorry I don't understand, because English is not my
ED]>
To: "Struts Developers List"
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on a release imply that the vote
intends to help support the release?
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So if you wouldn't +1 for a release
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> So if you wouldn't +1 for a release with no support, then what do you do
> to
> ensure support is available before +1ing?
Nothing: in real world, how do you ensure that a volunteer entity works?
Trust, belief that the volunteers are good people, and
5 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on a release imply that the vote
intends to help support the release?
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Why would you vote to release something knowing that once it's out there
may
be nobody to help people with problems?
I woul
2008/1/15, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Why would you vote to release something knowing that once it's out there
> may
> be nobody to help people with problems?
I wouldn't vote +1 for a release with no support, obviously. But I don't
feel obliged to do anything. My main "moral obligation"
o Petrelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Developers List"
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on a release imply that the vote
intends to help support the release?
2008/1/15, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Our community guide
2008/1/15, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Our community guidelines suggest that:
>
>
> "The act of voting carries certain obligations. Voters are not only
> stating their opinion, they are also agreeing to help do the work."
> ---
For me voting does not mean "obligation" of support, but
who do provide support be left to support a
release they didn't think should have been made?
- Original Message -
From: "Ted Husted" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Struts Developers List"
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 1:25 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Should voting +1 on
I vote for confidence only. While I'd like to help more in 2.x, it's
impossible for me to follow through with my intention sometimes. However, I
wouldn't want a good release help up by external obligations. I would hope a
good vibrant community would bring the intention of helping automatically,
bu
The ASF "How it work page", at "Implications of Voting", suggest that
---
"In some cases and communities, the exercise of a vote carries some
responsibilities that may not be immediately obvious. For example, in
some cases a favorable vote carries the implied message 'I approve and
I'm willing to
23 matches
Mail list logo
