Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] RE:[eclipse.org-membership-at-large]

[Bjorn Freeman-Benson <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Boris,
I think that the feedback you have received so far should be taken as a problem with the writers rather than a problem with the readers. If it was just one person "misreading" then that would be one thing, but when many of the senior Eclipse committers are "misreading", then it's probably a "mis-write" instead of a "mis-read". May I suggest that the words "The result was the design of a new platform ..." (and other similar words) tend to indicate the work is *complete* and thus no longer needing input from others. That may not have been your intent, but it sure comes across that way.

Boris Bokowski wrote:

You misread the announcement e-mail.  
  

And another item -- you said:

We realized (admittedly, very late) that nobody from the SWT team had
commit rights in the existing Eclipse Incubator project. Creating a new
component in that Incubator project was the fastest way to create a home
for experimental code that we will be demoing at EclipseCon, with write
access to everybody who has been involved so far 

So this begs two questions:
(1) Where was this code written, if it wasn't written *in public* in the Incubator? If it wasn't written in public then (1a) it needs to go through IP Review before being committed to the repository (sorry, that's the rule) and (1b) how can you claim that it's a public and open process if the code is not being written in public?

(2) If the Planning Council people are surprised by this announcement then you've been doing a poor job of building community, eh? I'd say that people like Doug and Doug are some of the more connected-to-what's-going-on people in Eclipse-land right now, so the fact that they are surprised by this announcement bodes poorly for open and public nature of this exploration to date.

- Bjorn

--
[end of message]