On 6 Oct 2006, at 18:10, Leo Simons wrote:
On Oct 5, 2006, at 4:19 PM, Mark Little wrote:
On 5 Oct 2006, at 14:54, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Mark Little wrote:
On 4 Oct 2006, at 23:20, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
You will, of course, infer and interpret events as you choose.
It's pretty obvious to me, a complete outsider, that there was
nothing 'random' about this at all.
"obvious" has nothing to do with it. Check your facts in future
please.
Lighten up, Mark.
I'm describing things from *my* perspective. Don't tell
me what my perspective is. I'm also responding to the
question you posed in the very first message in this
thread, before additional information was revealed, in
light of that information.
OK, fair enough ;-)
And yes, it's 'obvious' to me, in the same way that if
someone said Gandhi created al-Qaeda it would be 'obviously'
incorrect. When I referred to myself as a 'complete outsider,'
I meant with regard to this specific issue, not wrt the
ASF or incubator. I *do* have a little experience with
those.
If anyone considered altering the committer list, and it got
altered, there's nothing random about that. And that appears
- -- to me -- to be what happened.
We'll have to agree to disagree then.
Erm.
1) ASF is a meritocracy.
And people learn by questioning, not by being passive observers!
2) The mentors for CXF (well, until recently) have accumulated
loads of merit. Enough to be allowed to be mentors, and then some.
The guy you're disagreeing with has accumulated so much merit he
has difficulty passing through airport security (*).
And everyone makes mistakes (including you, myself and people in
Apache). To believe otherwise is to not live in the real world. To
not question others is to live in a totalitarian regime. If that's
what you want, then fine. But it's not my ideal.
(1)+(2) make it rather likely that, in this instance, those other
people might just know exactly what they're talking about. They
won't pull rank on you because that's never any fun and hardly
useful, but it serves you well to not simply cast their opinion aside.
So let's try to take this to some "logical" conclusion: you're saying
that just because person A says something that person B disagrees
with, person B should then accept that because person A is somehow
more experienced? Even factoring experience in (and experience ranges
across a lot of different areas, and I admit to being lacking in
Apache experience compared to many others, but certainly not lacking
in the field of computing), that's a crazy way to think. I'm sorry
but I don't recall reading in any of the Apache literature that a
frontal lobotomy was a pre-requisite to joining!
On the contrary, since you're apparently trying to become a
committer on an apache project, what you need to do is change your
mindset into one where their (and pretty much anyone else's until
proven otherwise) opinion holds, well, merit.
So lemmings are the kind of individuals you want in Apache? People
who just follow without questioning? Sorry, but I've been in this
industry for far too long to just follow things that appear to be
wrong. I have no idea of your own background and you obviously have
none about mine, so don't simply assume I'll stand quiet or fall into
"emperor's new clothes" mode. I am willing to learn. But if
differences of opinion aren't allowed in *any* society, we may as
well go back to the stone-age! I think your comments show a level of
naivete and to be honest, are uncalled for. Processes (governments,
corporate, open source etc.) grown and evolve because people question
them and push the boundaries. I think the original point of this
thread was such a push.
That mindset somehow tends to start with "the people around me are
trying to do the Right Thing", if you can't bring yourself around
to that world view, you might as well look for a more productive
environment right now.
Huh? OK, so you obviously live in some alternative reality to the
real world ;-) I'm happy to take this offline, because it is no
longer relevant to this discussion.
Secondly, I suggest you learn, and learn right now, to stop writing
things along the lines of ``is random denial of initial committers
typical?'' or ``I've used the Redhat/JBoss example already,
Get off your soapbox and stop trying to make this personal. To the
best of my knowledge, until this email this entire thread was not
personal. It was about people trying to figure out the right thing to
do in a complex situation.
but there are others where the communities thrive and grow because
of a more "enlightened" approach!'' or any number of statements
I've seen as part of this thread which we tend to label as
``flamebait'' around here.
Well if you're ever willing to enter into a reasoned discussion about
this as everyone else appears to be, let me know. Until then I'll
treat this email as static.
Thanks,
Mark.
Thanks,
LSD
(*) http://feathercast.org/?p=27
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
