From general-return-50548-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Wed Jul 29 17:27:17 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 8072F18464 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 39407 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jul 2015 17:27:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 39218 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jul 2015 17:27:06 -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 38909 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jul 2015 17:27:05 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:27:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 5703CD89C9 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:27:05 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.879 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.879 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-us-east.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zwHjgdHVF7SZ for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:27:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vn0-f48.google.com (mail-vn0-f48.google.com [209.85.216.48]) by mx1-us-east.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-us-east.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 53A62428DB for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 17:27:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vnaa140 with SMTP id a140so3964141vna.2 for ; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:25:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=jYyn3ltilLUEhX9XoJi3wzsd/vA6WV+FM8JDBynkwh0=; b=FAHDc4ID0GURfqQ1QbfZTl5dHjvdM5Bq83y3LR8wTfOi1MFL5SyIrMWCJsS/vizihP DPxMup0xm3OtY51lMAGQMS6jAkFxjLERBDMRygjJQMVQtej5pXrB/P/h4XsTmFsOLZUd 7mRDW6IgWta5DoGeR8RxbVWF8+ZBvM3bgX4QvntCPcqVZnn1MikiL1YBbCCZVc75eMi6 KGaZ7X/Ha1wW5NL1ZyDE7eLrViI4yANxiU0v8sa4uZ2vVIRuFsJ54YPzNIsW40RcVsNA SNrE46iwzwdcYfeDeP5u1jUSob+HOTpG79qTmL2yl8lLwLmovMWE/Wxxhbzbw/DT47FN NDrA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.52.104.7 with SMTP id ga7mr53659992vdb.16.1438190727617; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.12.84 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.31.12.84 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Jul 2015 10:25:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55B90151.7000803@apache.org> 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> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:25:27 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator From: Greg Stein To: Incubator Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136be7270646d051c06dfcb --001a1136be7270646d051c06dfcb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Jul 29, 2015 11:37 AM, "Branko =C4=8Cibej" wrote: > > On 29.07.2015 18:14, Joe Brockmeier wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015, at 03:19 AM, Branko =C4=8Cibej wrote: > >> Personally I'm not too happy with how this community tracks issues, bu= t > >> 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. -g --001a1136be7270646d051c06dfcb--