Ok in this case: I'm here already, and I will ask the committers to register to this list. -Markus From: ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ee4j-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ivar Grimstad
Sent: Mittwoch, 24. April 2019 18:49
To: EE4J PMC Discussions
Subject: Re: [ee4j-pmc] Note to Project Leads regarding the specification project process Markus, Isn't it in the committer's interest that the PMC reaches out to the project leads? Encouraging them to engage and participate? We are NOT excluding anyone, nor throwing anyone out of the boat. We are not having ANY discussions with anyone privately. Everything is in the open! That is one of the reasons why we want project leads, as well as committers, to be on the PMC mailing list. Please, focus on the right stuff here. We are actually doing exactly what I think that you are really asking for here, i.e. reaching out and encourage more involvement. Not the opposite. Ok Ivar, so given the fact that our current project lead neither encouraged committers in any way so far in the past year, nor discussed any questions the PMC asked him with the committers, what would YOU do in this situation? We, the committers, WANT to be part of this process, but our project lead is NOT taking us into the boat de facto. So what next? We MUST ask to replace him before the PMC will discuss directly with us? Really? Actually we had not in mind to replace him. We had in mind to be part of the process. Eclipse projects do have the notion of project leads. They are not bosses in any sense and don't have any more power than the committers. BUT they have responsibilities, and that is what Wayne asking for. One of those responsibilities is to join the PMC mailing list to take part in the information being sent there. Another one is to encourage committers to engage in the process. Please help focus on the important part here, which is to move this thing forward. It is not helpful criticizing every initiative that is being made. Note that Wayne said "We need all project leads to engage in this process with the EE4J PMC and your project team", which in my world means to discuss with committers. NOT deciding anything without discussions. I don't see anything controversial in this. +1 to Markus’ feedback. When I read the msg with Leads on it, it bothers me to no end. OSS doesn’t have bosses, it has Contributors. I recommend Leads gets dropped and Stewards gets added instead. It seems wasteful to even consider using that word during this process. — We know better, lets show it via actions. :) end of feedback! Concern: The existing project leads are mostly not elected but simply taken over from the JCP (hence, from Oracle), so their input not necessarily covers the opinion of the majority of the committers. Hence some questions should be discussed among the committers, not among the projects leads, or there should be project lead elections first. As discussed on our call today, I'm going to assemble a note to the EE4J project leads about getting engaged in this process. I'm going to convert the "The process to create the first set of Final Specifications" thread into a blog post and provide a link to it as a starting point for the discussion. For now, I'd like to avoid debating any specific part of this message in this thread and would instead like you to confirm that that I have the tone right and that I haven't missed anything important: I will send this note directly to the email addresses that we have on file for the project leads and I prefer to use direct email sparingly (so I very much appreciate your help in ensuring that I get it right the first time). The key messages with this are: please engage us on the ee4j-pmc mailing list, and please engage in the name and scope exercise. After I send this note to the project leads themselves, we'll engage them further on the pmc mailing list. Later tomorrow, I'll send out something like the following: Greetings EE4J Project Leads. I'm sending this note to the EE4J PMC's mailing list with you in blind copy. Some very important discussions regarding the future of the various projects engaged in Jakarta EE specification work are happening now and in the near future on that list. It is important that you be part of that discussion, so if you have not already done so, please join this list and join in the conversation.
We are at a point in the process where it's time to create specification projects as defined by the Eclipse Foundation Specification Process (EFSP) as a home for specification document development. Where possible and sensible, we will convert the existing "Eclipse Project for ..." projects into specification projects; in cases where this is not possible or sensible, we will create new specification projects.
This is where you come in. We need all project leads to engage in this process with the EE4J PMC and your project team. To that end, the PMC has set up a project board with individual tasks for each project. Please identify the tasks in the project name board and project scope board that apply to projects within your purview and engage there. Regarding names, the PMC has posted a naming standard for your consideration. If you have questions, connect with the PMC on the EE4J PMC list (and otherwise engage via that public channel). Thoughts? Concerns? Important additions? Director of Open Source Projects | Eclipse Foundation, Inc. _______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc _______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
_______________________________________________
ee4j-pmc mailing list
ee4j-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ee4j-pmc
|
