[VOTE] graduate harmony podling

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[VOTE] graduate harmony podling

Leo Simons
This is *not* an actual vote. The vote is on harmony-dev; see

        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/ 
200610.mbox/<[hidden email]>

This e-mail is only for archival purposes (Geir's first note about  
this to general@incubator is part of a long thread).

cheers,

Leo


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] graduate harmony podling

Roy T. Fielding
On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:24 AM, Leo Simons wrote:

> This is *not* an actual vote. The vote is on harmony-dev; see

Well, then, why did you call it a vote?  This is what we call
confusing the voters, ballot irregularities, "hanging chad", and
other fun things that cause unnecessary wars.

I don't understand why the mentors are making this process so hard.
At no time whatsoever during this entire discussion was it ever
possible for Harmony to have failed a graduation vote given the
number of PMC members who are involved in the project, yet you seem
bound and determined to attract as many -1s as possible by dicking
around with a fairly easy procedure.

Look, this is what I did for Jackrabbit:

<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200603.mbox/%[hidden email]%3E>

There is no need for special events, no need for advance polls of
consensus, no bizarre multi-list calls for non-voting votes, and
no pissing and moaning about the questions asked by Incubator PMC.
Just have the project vote on graduation FIRST and then use that as
fodder for the vote by Incubator PMC, answer the questions as best you
can, and be happy as individuals become satisfied and add their +1s.
When that looks like a positive outcome, send the resolution to the
board.

If you don't do that, my guess is that the board will tell you to
do it all again before the resolution is considered at the next
meeting, because Harmony is not a special case.

....Roy [anticipating that this message will be delayed due to move]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] graduate harmony podling

Niclas Hedhman
In reply to this post by Leo Simons
On Saturday 21 October 2006 18:24, Leo Simons wrote:
> This is *not* an actual vote. The vote is on harmony-dev; see
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/
> 200610.mbox/<[hidden email]>
>
> This e-mail is only for archival purposes (Geir's first note about
> this to general@incubator is part of a long thread).

Bad Prescedent(tm).

1. Anyone with a mild opinion will not bother, nor non-binding voters.
2. Any -1, providing a "why" will not be available to other voters, and likely
to be debated with the wrong people involved.


Cheers
Niclas

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

How to read and write e-mail @ apache (was: Re: [VOTE] graduate harmony podling)

Leo Simons
In reply to this post by Roy T. Fielding
Change the subject line when you change the subject...done.
Don't top post...failed!
Keep it short...failed!

Oh well...as for the rest...going by example...

The preface
-----------
On Oct 21, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:24 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
>> This is *not* an actual vote. The vote is on harmony-dev; see
>
> Well, then, why did you call it a vote?

You know, that *was* explained in the parts of the e-mail you  
snipped, if briefly. Once more...Geir called a vote on harmony-dev  
where he asked the people on this list to vote, too, then wrote an e-
mail about that to this list that was hidden inside a long thread:

        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e

I figured I'd drag that question out seperately outside of that  
thread since Bill expressed concern (in response to Geir's call to  
vote) that otherwise this stuff would somehow be hidden.

> This is what we call confusing the voters, ballot irregularities,  
> "hanging chad", and other fun things that cause unnecessary wars.

Hmm. I find this particular decision to hold a vote somewhere else  
from standard somewhat annoying (but understand the rationale), agree  
it is a confusing (lots of intelligent people around, hopefully  
they'll get what's going on), see irregularity but not with the  
ballot itself, have no idea what "hanging chad" means, and I don't  
understand how any of this is funny at this point. Being a pacifist,  
I certainly agree all wars are unnecessary.

Some actions I can think of that can cause flamewars include calling  
people names (in general, making a discussion personal rather than  
about an issue), ridiculing their ideas and efforts and grossly  
exaggerating a depiction of events. In my experience, on-which-
mailing-list-should-we-hold-which-vote can lead to a lot of  
discussion (where I seem to consistently be saying "this belongs in  
public, this belongs in public, etc", which I think is often worth  
the discussion since it helps preserve the ASF's transparancy in  
governing), but rarely flamewars.

> I don't understand why the mentors are making this process so hard.

It is clear by now that you don't understand or disagree with some of  
the decisions harmony's mentors have made or things they have done. I  
think I've made a big attempt at making a hard process (given the  
amount of e-mail the incubator regularly gets about its complex  
processes, I wouldn't say its easy) as easy as possible, so this  
comment frustrates me a lot, Roy. I hope you can qualify it so I may  
learn. Further down is a detailed POV with some specific questions on  
this.

> At no time whatsoever during this entire discussion was it ever
> possible for Harmony to have failed a graduation vote given the
> number of PMC members who are involved in the project, yet you seem
> bound and determined to attract as many -1s as possible by dicking
> around with a fairly easy procedure.

<joke type="bad">Oh yeah, I'm very determined to attract -1s. As much  
as possible. The way the "-" can sometimes hug the "1" if you have  
the right font...so much prettier than girls...</joke>

Seriously, can we please stick to civil language, and not attribute  
motivation that's so obviously, well, a misattribution?

> Look, this is what I did for Jackrabbit:
>
> <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
> 200603.mbox/%[hidden email]%3E>

I remember. I voted:
        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200603.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e

This is what I did for MerlinDeveloper:
        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200401.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200401.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
More than 2.5 years ago. Who said incubation processes change much?

The process description
-----------------------
> There is no need for special events, no need for advance polls of
> consensus, no bizarre multi-list calls for non-voting votes, and
> no pissing and moaning about the questions asked by Incubator PMC.

Agree on the first, reserve the right to disagree on the second,  
definitely disagree on the qualification for the third, resent the  
characterization of the fourth.

Specifically regarding advance polls, I've seen those work quite  
successfully when it comes to complex issues, especially after a long  
thread of [RT]s (see cocoon, for example, or gump). Alas, not this time.

Specifically regarding pissing and moaning, see below.

> Just have the project vote on graduation FIRST

Once again, that has happened, on harmony-private (yes, I complained  
about the vote being private. Like a broken record). It says so in  
the first line of the first e-mail on this subject:
        http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e

> and then use that as fodder for the vote by Incubator PMC,

fodder? As in cannon fodder?

> answer the questions as best you can,

I've just reviewed my e-mail on the previous thread wondering what  
you think I did that is so wrong. I don't get it.

A Brief History Of An Attempt To Be a Good Mentor
-------------------------------------------------
I started with an e-mail to entice my good friend Robert to jump in  
and help harmony, since I know he likes the project [1]. I wrote 7 e-
mails [2]-[8] that answered questions and addressed concerns, then  
wrote 1 summary e-mail of my view of the status at that point in time  
[9], since Greg asked me to gather thoughts into one summary e-mail  
instead of send seperate e-mails.

After the next day or so, as the discussion got messier, I wrote an e-
mail responding to several bits at once [10] (again, trying to limit  
my contribution to a long thread, full of long e-mails):

   1) some discussion about whether it was a valid request to ask to  
drop the request for a release
   2) some discussion about what exactly the "release state" of the  
harmony podling was

I also tried to address Greg's sentiment that issues were being  
"talked around" by in that e-mail being as clear (yet brief) in  
giving answers as I could possibly be. When that led to me (and more  
importantly, Tim, who'd first been lured out of hiding and then  
provided explicitly asked for valuable and specific input) being  
called a freakin' nut [11], I felt it was fair enough I'd respond to  
that (briefly, with some misguided humor, and an explicit suggestion  
to de-emotionalize the discussion) [12].

When I next saw Geir call a vote (yay! Out of his comfort zone! At  
the suggestion of several people! Good thing! Progress!) [13], I  
figured I'd better call some attention to that, given how many people  
read only the first 40 e-mails of a relatively boring thread [14],  
and given we had planned mail outage this weekend.

Huh?
----
Now, I agree having so many e-mails is not quite optimal and normally  
I try and make do with less, but that's what happens when you write  
[discussion] in a subject line [15].

With this summary of my one-sided view of all this, can you tell me,  
somewhat precisely if possible,
   * where I'm "making things hard",
   * where I'm "pissing and moaning"
   * and where I'm "dicking around"?

An example of what I consider making things hard is making unspecific  
references to private e-mail [16,17].
I would say "pissing and moaning" happens when you unnecessarily use  
strong language [18,19].

Please, help me out here. What am I misunderstanding?

The process description continues
---------------------------------
> and be happy as individuals become satisfied and add their +1s.

I was definitely happy about that. I normally express some amount of  
limited happiness where it doesn't hurt the efficiency of e-mail  
exchange [20], and leave it out once e-mail threads get over a  
certain size.

> When that looks like a positive outcome, send the resolution to the  
> board.

Since Geir really likes to do that kind of thing, me and Dims often  
manage to mess some detail up when it comes to formal language and  
processes (non-native-English people, you know), and Stefano  
passionately hates formal bits, I suspect he'll take care of that.

> If you don't do that, my guess is that the board will tell you to
> do it all again before the resolution is considered at the next
> meeting, because Harmony is not a special case.

I agree harmony is not a special case. I keep saying each podling is  
a little bit of a special case. I do hope the board will not ask us  
to do it *all* again...especially not the legal framework setup, that  
was particularly boring.


cheers,


Leo

[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[2] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[3] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[4] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[5] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[6] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[7] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[8] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[9] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[10] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[11] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%
[hidden email]%3e
[12] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[13] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[14] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[15] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[16] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[17] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e
[18] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
200610.mbox/%
[hidden email]%3e
[19] see comments above
[20] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-harmony-dev/ 
200610.mbox/ajax/%[hidden email]
%3e

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: How to read and write e-mail @ apache (was: Re: [VOTE] graduate harmony podling)

Roy T. Fielding
On Oct 23, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Leo Simons wrote:

> Change the subject line when you change the subject...done.

But you didn't change the subject, so that was a bad idea.

> On Oct 21, 2006, at 11:39 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> On Oct 21, 2006, at 3:24 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
>>> This is *not* an actual vote. The vote is on harmony-dev; see
>>
>> Well, then, why did you call it a vote?
>
> You know, that *was* explained in the parts of the e-mail you  
> snipped, if briefly.

Yeah, yeah, I know that part -- I snipped it because I am tired of the
long, very annoying, pissing and moaning process that seems to require
a larger quantity of email instead of simply doing the easy things that
I (and others) have suggested.

>> This is what we call confusing the voters, ballot irregularities,  
>> "hanging chad", and other fun things that cause unnecessary wars.
>
> Hmm. I find this particular decision to hold a vote somewhere else  
> from standard somewhat annoying (but understand the rationale),  
> agree it is a confusing (lots of intelligent people around,  
> hopefully they'll get what's going on), see irregularity but not  
> with the ballot itself, have no idea what "hanging chad" means, and  
> I don't understand how any of this is funny at this point. Being a  
> pacifist, I certainly agree all wars are unnecessary.

The point is: Harmony would have graduated last week if you had simply
done a public vote on harmony-dev followed by a public vote on general
at incubator.  That's all there is to it.  ALL OTHER COMMUNICATION  
beyond
those simple two tasks are totally unnecessary and caused simply because
the mentors are not doing what everyone else expects of a podling.

>> I don't understand why the mentors are making this process so hard.
>
> It is clear by now that you don't understand or disagree with some  
> of the decisions harmony's mentors have made or things they have  
> done. I think I've made a big attempt at making a hard process  
> (given the amount of e-mail the incubator regularly gets about its  
> complex processes, I wouldn't say its easy) as easy as possible, so  
> this comment frustrates me a lot, Roy. I hope you can qualify it so  
> I may learn. Further down is a detailed POV with some specific  
> questions on this.

It is easy if you do it the way I did it for Jackrabbit.  It would have
been even easier for Harmony given the number of PMC members involved.
How can I qualify it any better than that -- you had the votes already,
and this interminable DISCUSSION-WITHOUT-VOTING is just costing votes.

>> At no time whatsoever during this entire discussion was it ever
>> possible for Harmony to have failed a graduation vote given the
>> number of PMC members who are involved in the project, yet you seem
>> bound and determined to attract as many -1s as possible by dicking
>> around with a fairly easy procedure.
>
> <joke type="bad">Oh yeah, I'm very determined to attract -1s. As  
> much as possible. The way the "-" can sometimes hug the "1" if you  
> have the right font...so much prettier than girls...</joke>
>
> Seriously, can we please stick to civil language, and not attribute  
> motivation that's so obviously, well, a misattribution?

That was a sarcastic view of your actions so far.  Allow me to  
demonstrate ...

>> Just have the project vote on graduation FIRST
>
> Once again, that has happened, on harmony-private (yes, I  
> complained about the vote being private. Like a broken record). It  
> says so in the first line of the first e-mail on this subject:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/ 
> 200610.mbox/%[hidden email]%3e

QED.  You do know my opinion on voting in private, right?  You do  
realize
this is a public decision that must be made by the project, not by the
mentors or any individuals who happen to reside on the private list,  
right?
So, you should understand that holding an important project discussion
on the private mailing list, let alone a vote, is more than sufficient
justification for everyone here to vote -1 on graduation.  Right?

Why isn't that clear?  It is absolutely forbidden for any Apache project
to manage the project from a private list, with special exceptions
given for voting on personnel and non-disclosure security items.
I reminded people of that when I changed the list names by including
the full text of the board resolution.  Everyone on the list is  
responsible
for preventing its misuse and, if need be, request removal of the  
private
list if the participants can't use it correctly.  When someone  
misdirects a
public discussion to a private list, the only appropriate response is
to end that discussion and move it public.  If they don't obey,
terminate the project.

Again, each reply I have received so far has made me less and less
inclined to vote for graduation of Harmony.  I had no reason to believe
there was anything wrong with the project until this discussion started,
and the project itself seems to be behaving correctly, but this whole
graduation discussion is just one fatal mistake after another.

....Roy

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]