> Benjamin Tomhave wrote: > > First off, everybody needs to quit whining. Seriously, if Tom hadn't > taken up the reins, there would be ZERO DEVELOPMENT on this > project right > now. Unless you were willing to send a truck of cash to Inter7, they > would often not even respond to emails asking whether > development would > continue, let alone addressing actual, verified bugs in the code. >
I don't think anyone is complaining about Tom taking a lead role in the development of vpopmail. The question is a matter of what role, if any, Ken Jones should play. > Second, if there's confusion about what a "devel" release is versus a > stable release, then I suggest you go back to kindergarten, > because this > is NOT A NEW METHOD for developing an open source project. No one is suggesting there shouldn't be development releases. But for use in a true production environment, there needs to be stable releases as well. > If you're confused, perhaps it's because you're not very smart, in > which case maybe > you ought not be a systems administrator. Some of us are > running devel > code in our production environments because we needed > features that Inter7 > didn't seem inclined to add, such as seekable patch, etc. Under the > pressure of meeting customer demands, it has been absolutely > necessary to > install devel releases. HOWEVER, that DOESN'T MEAN > installing EVERY devel > release -- just installing one that seems stable while providing the > needed functionality. > Hey, if you can get away with running development code in a production environment, more power to you. Some of us don't have that luxury, regardless of whether or not the development release has features we really want. Not everyone on this list has the programming skills and/or the amount of time and manpower to validate a release as stable. > Third, there are certainly improvements that can be made to > the PROCESS. > But, btw, in case everybody was sleeping when he announced it, Tom has > created a vpopmail-devel mailing list where all of you can > contribute to > the devel discussions, where, oh btw, the question of CVS > access has been > presented previous and will, I believe, be forthcoming. > Good to know. > Should this be a separate fork? No. Why? Because, imho, > regardless of > what Ken Jones might claim, vpopmail has been shelved by > Inter7, and is > thus a dead product without this open source SF project. Inter7 has > failed, probably for economic reasons, to continue supporting > the product > in the open source community, which has been a very common > occurrence over > the past few years. That anybody took over the development > and moved it > forward is quite amazing, and I think we all ought to > heartily thank Tom > for doing so. > Do you work for Inter7? Can you speak definitively to the fact that they've shelved vpopmail for good on their end? No, you can't. It's purely speculation which you're stating as fact. I've seen enough projects in enough companies get put on hold for periods of time because there was something else that required more attention. Heck, I've had projects I've worked on get put on hold because management decided something else was a more pressing matter only to return to the project when the pressing matter had been completed. A great deal of thanks goes to Tom for taking a lead role while this was going on. However, I still believe that Ken Jones, by virtue of the work he has done in the past does deserve consideration for an admin role. Failure of Inter7's management to recognize the need for either visibly active development or at the very least, acknowledge the fact that Ken's hands were currently tied due to being assigned other projects should not be held against Ken. > Now, onto the specific concerns raised, I think the following practice > should be adopted: > 1) CVS should be enabled. Agreed. > 2) If KJ wants to be an admin, then he needs to justify his > request more > than "it was my baby originally", and then he should be added. Disagree. If Linus Torvalds had to step away from working on the Linux kernel for an extended period of time, would he have to justify why he still deserved to be a lead on the project? > 3) Instead of "releasing" devel releases, I think we should > switch to a > "nightly build" approach so that there is "stable-current" and then > "latest-devel", and not a string of devel releases. Tom, I > would probably > list 3 packages total: 5.2.x-stable, the last 5.3.x release > from Inter7, > and then 5.3.x-latest-devel. I would make one change to this idea. Instead of listing the latest 5.2.x-stable as well as the last 5.3.x release from Inter7, someone (perhaps Ken Jones) should go through that last Inter7 5.3.x release and figure out what needs to be done to make that a new stable release. > 4) Inter7 needs to get over themselves and gradually join > back into the > development, IF AND ONLY IF they plan to play nicely with > others. If they > don't, then maybe they should go get bent since there's been a ton of > positive movement on this project in their absence. NO FORKING. > Define play nicely with others? Catherine's inappropriate comments aside (and the fact that you felt the need to point out how carefully your words were chosen, Catherine, only serves to highlight how inappropriate they were), I've seen no evidence to suggest an ulterior motive on Ken's part with regards to vpopmail. I simply don't see the threat in having Ken as an administrator. Even if he were to do something as stupid as try and kick Tom off from the list of administrators, as some seem to be suggesting, all that would be necessary is to truly fork the project and shut Inter7 out completely. > Disclaimer: If you disagree with these comments, that's your > prerogative, > but I personally don't want to hear sniping comments back about it, > because frankly, I don't value the opinion of most of you. The list > membership over the past year has become overpopulated with > whiny idiots > who have no appreciation for where the product has been, how it almost > died, and how it has now seen tremendous progress in the > absence of Ken > and Inter7. > Your opinions would be even more valuable if you would quit with the derogatory comments. People who disagree with you are not necessarily idiots. They are not necessarily inferior sysadmins. They simply have a different point of view. Regards, Robert Kropiewnicki
