|Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo selection|
I think I understand Markus' point very well.
I think that there are already enough ways to influence and participate in steering Jakarta EE even for committers and contributors. You have to understand that companies and institutions like LJC are not a single individual
but also represent many people, interests and also a lot of investment.
I believe it's OK if the community is represented in the committees at the same level as any other member since, as clarified by Mike Millinkovich earlier, there aren't so many active individuals in Jakarta EE projects and their number can be compared to a number of committers from a bigger company. I clarified the numbers in my other post here: https://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/ee4j-community/msg01327.html
If time shows that there are much more individual contributor voices than it seems now, I would be one of the first vendor representatives to advocate for increasing the number of commiter members in Jakarta EE committees.
But for now I think 10-20% is enough.
Ondrej MihályiSenior Payara Service Engineer
Payara Server – Robust. Reliable. Supported.
E: ondrej.mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx | T: +1 415 523 0175 | M: +421 902 079 891
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Payara Services Limited, Registered office: Unit 11, Malvern Hills Science Park, Geraldine Road, Malvern, WR14 3SZ
Registered in England and Wales: 09998946 | www.payara.fish | info@xxxxxxxxxxx | @Payara_Fish
From: ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <ee4j-community-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Mariano Amar <mariano.amar@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 27 March 2018 20:39:15
To: EE4J community discussions
Subject: Re: [ee4j-community] Community Control was Jakarta EE logo selection
I believe you're missing Markus' point completely.
It's not that any person could go all the way up to being a committee member without paying one cent.
The point he's trying to make is that the power of the average individual in the community is pretty much nil. This is a matter of power being completely skewed towards the paying members, where they get one seat each just for paying, while thousands of individuals, together, get a single seat (maybe two, or three at best).
That means that, while I would need to work my *** off, and greatly contribute to the Jakarta EE project for years, and then become recognized enough to win a vote for a single seat in a specific committee, I could just as well gain a single seat in every single committee by paying a fee.
Yes, it's not as simple as just paying the fees (you need to have a certain amount of employees/members in a group that are dedicated committers), but that actually just widens the breach, as you not only need to pay the fee, you have to sustain a handful of committers.
I'm not going to ask for a direct democracy, that's just insane. I'm ok with weighted votes. But the disparity in the current weights makes the belief of the general community having any power an utter fallacy.
Yes, we'll have full control over the direction of any sub-project we're directly involved with. That's not a lie.
But you seem to be ignoring the fact those projects cannot be considered part of Jakarta EE, or their processes be considered to follow Jakarta specs, or their inclusion be guaranteed into the umbrella project, without approval from the WGs, where we won't have any power at all.
This communication contains information that is confidential and may also be privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the recipient. If you are not the intended note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information it contains is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error please notify us by email(info@xxxxxxxxxx) or phone (+54 11 3249 7503)
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Ondrej Mihályi <ondrej.mihalyi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Back to the top