From general-return-50552-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Wed Jul 29 19:08:50 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 21DFA18893 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 19:08:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 5271 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jul 2015 19:08:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 5081 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jul 2015 19:08:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 5070 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jul 2015 19:08:49 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mail-relay.apache.org) (140.211.11.15) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 19:08:49 +0000 Received: from zulu.23.e-reka.si (cpe-46-164-5-176.dynamic.amis.net [46.164.5.176]) by mail-relay.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mail-relay.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 75CB31A0094 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 19:08:48 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <55B924BD.4020100@apache.org> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 21:08:45 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?QnJhbmtvIMSMaWJlag==?= Organization: The Apache Software Foundation User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator References: <55AF42D1.50801@apache.org> <8EDEABC0-28A5-4DAB-844C-CCB484E97FF9@apache.org> <55B0061A.3000707@apache.org> <20150722231648.GU28615@boudnik.org> <20150723011109.GD4306@tpx> <55B09591.60700@apache.org> <1438186442.3757361.336422969.20696CD0@webmail.messagingengine.com> <55B90151.7000803@apache.org> <20150729175210.GN30506@boudnik.org> In-Reply-To: Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAAXNSR0IArs4c6QAAADBQTFRF IhsbCy0qZjoVOVRoeFxSAIKBzXQiAKaibYiewnk7nn9z0qCTgL3i87Ep6Kx/+tHBsrE+zgAAAjZJ REFUOMvF0jFoE1EYB/CzjWlqIzaTjqVIBifRRWyG0t5iUqlLyFpCeXBgKg5yq6A4degUDJjoUDpc 1Qt4Ux94B11SOLB0KGS4discpbkORTCn9/m9d3fvLhXnvuHu3f+Xx/veyyfZfLSdZHzgicSfeyw4 JISwdz8FT6M8lM8Ceg385Dlhs+cC9sQCDn0B78QCogzwN+sxfHGOIXBbRGkNAM4cZymGtgNsDPgz cByxon3EEm1TLmvAlghoHOO3CZSa+IQ/vF6JV8tgKOMow78gRgL2/+EIvATOUtB3SSdMg4GXgrbn uk0uLiGdoCHKbX4E+t1FUTqn1AtIdPJebssDQ64YANSQyyaQNyUOFs0ijMsMFnOPTahPLXKYowtY 08MfCP7vR7hRnc5zmPK7CDYYbHcbC7tHuyFA94U/1LYZaJpu/sxACHMwvwZljTLY0TbNk4x+zuEt yC3MfCM6uSIvfwur0itFL4FA2Yal8BzLfnYV4EIGwEPAk7o5zIcnvzHMEjwJrrhAKK7on6IrsfRJ 7A53BhaK+CL7fj6+q/sPeOvcDTtoZTxpUYsFeIknrOXep3p3l7Ua+8sZ5FPQKyKwWi+DfROTU7ny C1/9UhpeY7K287WJCzbsNPQm2S6Yk4PSCNhWM2r3nD0K9liYb6yPgCRJhSzPrxUK0yUBVk1VX0lj s7MzGZyp0wImMK/e8rHbz2soL+O+2r1dxfGsAmBcx0lNjS/RUhlUC7gRn1wGMdQ7Vw1/AReW/RN3 xFWdAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 29.07.2015 19:51, Greg Stein wrote: > On Jul 29, 2015 12:45 PM, "Konstantin Boudnik" wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:25PM, Greg Stein wrote: >>> On Jul 29, 2015 11:37 AM, "Branko Čibej" wrote: >>>> On 29.07.2015 18:14, Joe Brockmeier wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015, at 03:19 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: >>>>>> Personally I'm not too happy with how this community tracks > issues, but >>>>>> hey, if it works for them, why fix it? It'll be a fine day when the >>> IPMC >>>>>> starts telling podlings how their development workflow should look >>> like. >>>>> Does "works for them" translate into "people not currently in the >>>>> community can follow how the existing community tracks issues, so > they >>>>> can contribute and become part of the community"? If so, then maybe > it's >>>>> OK. If it's not transparent to folks not currently part of that >>>>> community, it's hard to see how the community will sustain itself > with >>>>> new members as other folks inevitably move on to other projects. >>>> Given that new contributors keep showing up on a regular basis, I have >>>> to assume that it's not so opaque as all that. >>>> >>>> Anyway, Ignite has been discussing and implementing a revised (and IMO >>>> better) set of policies for Jira use and git workflow since this >>>> discussion started; other than displaying an incomprehensible > preference >>>> for RTC, it seems to be going well. >>> I always translate RTC as "we don't trust you, so somebody else must >>> approve anything you do." >>> >>> To me, that is a lousy basis for creating a community. Trust and peer >>> respect should be the basis, which implies CTR. I have seen many excuses >>> for RTC, but they all are just window dressing over mistrust. >> While I tend to agree with you, it worth noting that there's a whole > bunch of >> TLPs sticking to RTC. So, this data point doesn't reflect on the podling > in >> question. > And POW!! There is one excuse on display already :-P > > "But others do it." How 'bout I propose a board resolution forbidding RTC at the ASF for mainline development? :) -- Brane --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org