[sakai2-tcc] Infrastructure discussion for future meeting?

[Anthony Whyte]

Hold on my right honorable friend but I don't recall any TCC decision being rendered in the case of Aaron's suggestion that rwiki be "dropped to contrib".  Nor did I sense that we had achieved consensus on the question.  A few opinions were provided on both sides of the issue, that's it.  Tool deprecation/removal is a non-trivial matter and requires something a bit more formal than what was served up in the recent thread on the subject.   

No proposal, no decision.  Just talk.   That said, until a proposal is presented to the TCC for consideration the status quo, remains unchanged--rwiki remains an unstealthed part of core.

Cheers,

Anthony


> By the way the rwiki decision was complete a long time ago - we talked about deprecating or removing - some folks advocated for the idea and in less than 8 hours other folks said 'leave it alone' and gave a good rationale.  In PMC-style decision making it is not about the number of votes per se - but the fact that the 'don't change things' voice had solid rationale meant - end of discussion decision made.   And the decision was completely made in public on-list so anyone could comment on the process if they had a strong opinion.  Things worked perfectly. rwiki continues unchanged. 



On Mar 11, 2013, at 5:05 PM, Charles Severance wrote:

> Steve, 
> 
> If you look at the Apache Incubator process:
> 
> http://incubator.apache.org/
> 
> The primary purpose is to help projects to be brought in.   They need to clear IP, get to their first release, and have a stable community.
> 
> Well-established projects in Apache don't put themselves back in incubation to get advice on a deprecation discussion.   As an example if the Tomcat PMC were to wonder if it would be a good idea to deprecate the JK connector, they would not use the incubation process to inform the decision and the would not put the JK connector code into incubation.
> 
> Those building the Apereo Incubation need to make sure that their primary purpose is to make expanding Apereo by adding new projects is as smooth as possible.  Dropping in an consulting with a PMC trying to work through a simple decision decision seems like it should be out of scope of incubation.
> 
> I think that if the incubation of Apereo decides to define its own scope that it is somehow much broader than the Apache incubation scope - it will not be a smart move for Apereo.  Apereo Incubation should have a primary function of adding new communities and projects to Apereo and focus on it and become really good at it.   Apache has been doing this for 20 years - we can learn from them.
> 
> By the way the rwiki decision was complete a long time ago - we talked about deprecating or removing - some folks advocated for the idea and in less than 8 hours other folks said 'leave it alone' and gave a good rationale.  In PMC-style decision making it is not about the number of votes per se - but the fact that the 'don't change things' voice had solid rationale meant - end of discussion decision made.   And the decision was completely made in public on-list so anyone could comment on the process if they had a strong opinion.  Things worked perfectly. rwiki continues unchanged. 
> 
> Note that it took less than 24 hours for the TCC to reach consensus on the original decision with about 100 words of email exchanged.   We are over a week discussing the notion of somehow involving the incubation group in a TCC decision.  One of the benefits of the TCC/PMC is that it makes decisions quickly and we spend more time making our product better and less time building machinery to make decisions.
> 
> /Chuck
> 
> On Mar 11, 2013, at 6:59 AM, Steve Swinsburg wrote:
> 
>> This whole discussion came about because it was suggested that a very popular tool be removed from core. There is currently no way to measure a tool against another one.
>> 
>> I simply suggested that the upcoming incubation process might be able to quantify that decision. People then wanted dates and details, which haven't been fully worked out yet and because of that, the process and those in Apereo were attacked for not being open.
>> 
>> I thought it was important to let people know that an incubation process was being worked on, and that any major decision like a tool removal should probably be a guided one.
>> 
>> This thread has clearly spiralled out of control though I have stoodfast in defending myself and the process that I am working on, with many others, to help improve the quality of Apereo projects going forward. I have been involved with incubation in Jasig for a long time and its a great thing to go though because you know people are helping and want to see your project succeed.
>> 
>> Details and dates will be forthcoming in the coming weeks as per Ian's email. It will be a very helpful and friendly process, so chin up and turn frowns upside down.
>> 
>> Lets get back to making our software even better.
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Steve
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/attachments/20130311/3446daff/attachment.html