Is it possible for a committer in Commons to simply declare Lazy Consensus and checkin code to a new branch?
If so go ahead and see if a community forms. If a substantive conversation occurs. If not then propose it and VOTE on giving Giles a branch (olive or fig) and see what happens? Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 22, 2016, at 4:36 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:58:10 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote: >> Gilles wrote: >> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 11:04:48 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >>>> From the Peanut Gallery, >>>> >>>> All of this discussion on (too many at once) [VOTE] threads suggest >>>> to me that the [VOTE]s are premature. >>>> >>>> I don't understand the inclination to conduct [VOTE]s here that are >>>> at best straw votes and generally serve to establish that there is no >>>> consensus because of all the qualifications that are placed on the >>>> few >>>> [VOTE]s that are apparently cast in the blur of discussions. >>>> >>>> I think the key matter is that there is not enough discussion to >>>> tease out consensus and even find opportunities for lazy consensus. >>>> Then a [VOTE] becomes a formal ratification in those rare cases where >>>> such a thing is required (e.g., to back up a personnel action or take >>>> a resolution to the Board). >>>> >>>> I think these discussions about clustering/splitting the Commons Math >>>> components are very useful and interesting to observe. The use of >>>> [VOTE] is worrisome and apparently useless other than for the >>>> attention it evokes. >>> >>> There was a vote because Jörg saw it as useful in order to decide >>> about the next step: >>> http://markmail.org/message/2lvirahwxerq36d2 >>> >>> How much longer should we rehash the same arguments from all sides? >> >> >> The main problem is that the complete situation is unique. There has been no >> precedence for such a case so far. I cannot think of splitting a commons >> component in the last decade. > > Comparison proves nothing. > The ML archive is littered by warnings of mine that CM was not a component > like the other Commons components. > You persist by willing to treat it such although you now have seen that > the assumption led to a nasty situation for everyone. > >> If the intent is to go TLP with complete CM and the resubmit some basic >> stuff in a view light-weight new components for Commons. For those we might >> as well shorten this path and take the direct way. > > +1 RNG > +1 Complex numbers > +1 Math functions > +1 Rational numbers > >> Especially since two >> attempts to vote for TLP got us nowhere until now. > > All would-be contributors voted "yes". > A few non-contributors were mildly opposed. > Someone mentioned that no veto should apply. > > So I don't get the "got us nowhere". > >>> The bottom-line of all this is that there are people (new and old >>> contributors to CM) who wish to do things, and everything that they >>> say _they_ will do is blocked by people who never contributed to CM >>> and do not intend to. >> >> Again. Ouch. > > Well, yes! > That's the way it is, to my dismay. > > For all the discourse on diversity, and welcoming contributors, > and letting people who do things decide, the only thing that > was concretely accepted as "fine" is the fork of Commons Math > outside Apache! > > While people who want to build something new out of the mess left > behind are struggling for weeks in order to be allowed to get to > productive work. > > Non-contributors have nothing to loose, the Commons PMC members > have nothing to loose, by letting us try what we propose. > If it does not turn into something interesting, the situation will > be the same as it is now. > And you can start from the exact same point in the history of the > "Commons Math" code and try something else. > > Gilles > >> - Jörg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
