On Oct 20, 2006, at 1:24 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
On 10/19/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 19, 2006, at 3:32 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
...
> I'd like to ask that those who have asked for a release to assuage
> concerns about community health and capability to please read those
> 3 testaments from the mentors (ok, in Leo's case, 71 or so...) and
> please consider withdrawing your request for a release.
That's silly
And that's not a constructive statement. Let's call everything silly...
-- why would people who think a release (or at least the
release process) is a useful learning process drop such a *request*?
Because they recognize the project has better things to do. Or trust
the project to make that decision.
I could understand your concern if it was expressed as a requirement,
but it most certainly wasn't.
Right.
Ok. Maybe this helps: it was a silly request. Asking to drop a silly
request is not silly.
I said it would be useful to see if the community can make it happen.
And I don't think it is useful. I (arrogant me!) think I know better,
since I've spent the last year-and-a-half mentoring that community.
I know that *some individuals* can, but that is different.
Not very. Communities are made of individuals working together.
That's harmony. Go watch it live on harmony-dev now if you want.
I didn't vote, I didn't say it was a requirement, just asked: why
can't
you pull together a *developer* release.
It exists and it's called "HDK", for "Harmony Developer Kit". I gave
links to the docs explaining this yesterday. Tim gave links to e-
mails with more details.
Not TCK'd, not for Joe User,
but something more formal than "here is a snap of Subversion".
The community can no doubt do that, but until recently decided it
wasn't in the project's best interest. They're right. It now seems to
be in the project's best interest because the incubator PMC thinks
different from the project community. The incubator PMC is wrong, but
its good to stay friends with them, so the project is now shifting
gears a little bit to comply with the request.
Something that developers in and around the Incubator can try.
Try the binary.
Or simply for (Incubator) people to observe how you plan to
organize the
community to get a release out the door.
That's the jump-through-hoops request right there.
Without seeing that, you could graduate to a TLP that may be fully
incapable of producing a release. Ever.
Highly unlikely. Nevertheless -- so? I know of at least one TLP
that's never produced a release, yet is a shining example (if an
inactive one right now) of how TLPs can work.
I have zero indication that
the Harmony community can actually produce releases. Code, yes.
Releases, no.
The community thinks it can. Its mentors think it can. The harmony
community is a very healthy apache-style community.
Please don't call that zero indication.
Don't you think it would be a useful experiment for the Harmony
community?
No [1].
Or are you viewing it solely as make-work?
Yes.
That you're
confident that the Harmony community will not suffer problems that
we've seen in other communities around their release processes?
No. They will have many of those problems and several no apache
community has ever addressed. And they will fix them. Which is what
matters.
The decision is certainly the community's
Doesn't seem that way:
On Oct 19, 2006, at 12:08 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Besides, I was about to vote +1. You just changed my vote to -1.
On Oct 19, 2006, at 8:28 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
If not - I'm no longer neutral, but strongly -1 on graduation at
this time.
etc. In harmony-land, -1s are rare because the community is very good
at reaching consensus, hence they're taken quite seriously, and taken
care of if possible. Silly or not.
(actually... where are they?
Taking a silly request and figuring out what work to do satisfy it:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/
200610.mbox/browser
why is Geir the only active Harmony person in this conversation?).
Why not? The road of least resistance is just to produce a milestone.
The reason to stay part of the conversation is so the next podling in
the pipeline doesn't encounter similar silly resistance.
I'd like to hear the community say, "nah. we think that would be
busy work
with no utility."
Like Tim said, that can be arranged. Would you like a vote on it so
you can be sure its the entire community saying it and not just 5
people?
I think that's a silly thing to like to hear, since the fact the
community is
(a) going to be asking for graduation
(b) has plans and roadmap for release
(c) in every way quite a healthy apache-style community
implies that answer already.
Fair answer, but I will note that nobody has made a
clear statement like that. Talked around the issue, but never directly
answered.
Hpff. You witnessed attempts at politeness. It's how one deals with
sillyness.
Harmony doing a release now would be busy work with no utility.
Harmony is going to do a release now anyway, just to make sure, since
it is a community that aims to please.
I guess that ends this saga. Next up -- incubating the incubator. It
seems ever-more broken to me.
cheers,
LSD
[1] - this subject has received continued attention over the last
year and a half. For something the size and complexity of harmony,
build&release processes are the subject of constant attention. For
example, see
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/
200609.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
