Thank you you for confirming my point: there was a mistake and it needs to be corrected. End of story. But instead of simply fixing it and moving on, we are spending hours x 50 people on reading and writing long emails arguing about imaginary semantical differences.
There's no need to be emotional about who said what: I deserve the benefits of the doubt as well despite being a "former mentor of the project" whatever the hell it means. I am not dismissing the value of your contributions to this community: I welcome and appreciate your efforts! Neither have I targeted you nor put your on the stand - you did it to yourself. If you don't like something you think I addressed to you - send me a private email and explain that I was a jerk and hurt your feelings: no need to make a public display of potential nothingness. Would I choose to listen to it or not - is a separate matter altogether: I have the same right to not read or accept something that another person has wrote. Let's move on. Best, Cos On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 01:16AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > There has been no negligence, Cos! People are human and make mistakes. End > of the story. > > Bringing such negative verbiage to the community helps in nothing. > Everybody is doing their best, I'd like to think so. > > In fact, you have shifted the conversation away from the actual topic at > hand. So thanks. > > A suggestion: "Benefit of the doubt" is a powerful practice and keeps us > away from errors in judgement. > > With regards your list of questions, may I ask you to re-read your initial > message. Don't make me explain what's obvious, mate. > > Cheers. > On 28 Sep 2015 23:41, "Konstantin Boudnik" <c...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hmm... > > > > Negligence, n. : the trait of neglecting responsibilities and lacking > > concern > > syn : omission, oversight > > > > Doesn't sound catastrophic in my vocabulary, really. Does this > > > case of negligence and needs to be addressed accordingly. > > translate to "should face a firing squad without a trial of his peers"? > > Have I anywhere pointed a finger at you or anyone else? Or attacked > > someone? Why are you all upset and defensive about it? > > > > Cos > > > > On September 28, 2015 7:39:51 AM PDT, Raul Kripalani <ra...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >Cos, your language seems too harsh for the situation. > > > > > >No one here is committing negligence. The explanation is simple: people > > >aren't perfect. > > > > > >Now, let's take a step back and see the big picture. Around 95% of the > > >commits in this project are by GridGain personnel (check git shortlog > > >-s > > >-n) who have spent months/years working on this codebase during their > > >daily > > >job. Their eyes are accustomed to this code style and naturally they'll > > >spot oddities in a twitch. It's obvious. > > > > > >For newer people, we don't even have checkstyle nor decent facilities > > >for > > >newer people to spot formatting issues quickly. Because, surprise! The > > >issues that Yakov spotted are simply of formatting. The code is > > >functional > > >and much better tested than other streamers and IP Finders. Other > > >streamers > > >have 1 test, this streamer has 9 unit tests! Look at the code. > > >Furthermore, > > >Yakov seems to have made a mistake reading the Git commit history. > > >There > > >were never WIP commits on master. > > > > > >So may I ask you to stop using catastrophic vocabulary. The situation > > >is > > >not catastrophic, it's simply improvable. > > > > > >Now, as an ASF member, I ask you to recognise that unaffiliated > > >volunteers > > >like me bring diversity to the project that's otherwise dominated by a > > >company. You should appreciate that – more so given that you're a > > >former > > >mentor. I do this for the fun, and attacks like yours take the fun out > > >of > > >it. Have a look again at this project's team composition and, for those > > >people not affiliated to GridGain, try to find when their last commit > > >was... Then you'll see what I mean. > > > > > >P.S.: I did not merge the ZK IP Finder myself and I'm assuming that > > >Valentin will want to comment. > > > > > >Regards, > > > > > >*Raúl Kripalani* > > >PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data > > >and > > >Messaging Engineer > > >http://about.me/raulkripalani | > > >http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani > > >http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk > > > > > >On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> > > >wrote: > > > > > >> Are these official guidelines that are worked-out and communicated by > > >> community? Basically, were they made clear when the project went on > > >the CTR > > >> model? I presume it is/was looking at the wikipage. Hence > > >non-sticking > > >> to them is a case of negligence and needs to be addressed > > >accordingly. > > >> > > >> I would also want to highlight the other side of such negligence: by > > >> dumping > > >> semi-baked code to the master one creates a burden for the rest of > > >the > > >> community as the code degrades in quality, potentially breaks tests, > > >style > > >> checks, etc. And someone else needs to deal with it to unblock her's > > >future > > >> progress. And that's brings forward another point that Brane and I > > >were > > >> making on a few occasions: in the CTR communities you need to invite > > >in > > >> people > > >> with great deal of attention to how they work with others. Are they > > >> respecting > > >> others' time and effort? Are they good citizens of the community? And > > >on, > > >> and > > >> on. > > >> > > >> Another purely technically matter: master isn't a trash can. Master > > >should > > >> be > > >> close to releasable at any given point of time. WIP stuff doesn't > > >belong to > > >> master, that's what the dev and integration branches are for. > > >> > > >> Cos > > >> > > >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:31PM, Yakov Zhdanov wrote: > > >> > Guys, > > >> > > > >> > I have just reviewed the code and have some comments. 1-2 are very > > >> serious > > >> > from my point of view. > > >> > > > >> > 1. Code is in master. Did anyone checked tests on TC? Moreover, are > > >there > > >> > suites for those tests? > > >> > 2. It seems that work on streamer has been done directly in master. > > >I see > > >> > WIP commits, but I think I should not. As agreed finished work > > >should be > > >> > committed as a single set of changes. > > >> > 3. I see unused variable > > >> > - org.apache.ignite.stream.mqtt.MqttStreamer#cachedLogPrefix > > >> > 4. Unused import - import com.google.common.base.Joiner; > > >> > 5. Code and javadocs lines exceed 120 chars restriction. > > >> > 6. Plenty of javadocs issues - absence, multiline "inheritdoc", > > >etc. > > >> > 7. Spacing is not correct - in ignite codebase logical blocks are > > >> separated > > >> > with blank line. > > >> > 8. There should always be a blank line at the end of each file. > > >> > 9. retrier vs retryier issue. > > >> > > > >> > Who is in charge for this code? Raul, Val? Can anyone fix my > > >comments? > > >> > > > >> > I would also ask everyone (even committers) not to commit to master > > >> without > > >> > doing review with another committer. > > >> > > > >> > Here is the link to Ignite's coding guidelines - > > >> > > > >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines. > > >> Feel > > >> > free to suggest and discuss edits if anything does not seem valid > > >to you. > > >> > > > >> > Thanks! > > >> > > > >> > --Yakov > > >> > >
