[Framework-Team] FWT next meeting

[Timo Stollenwerk]

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Timo Stollenwerk <tisto at plone.org> wrote:

> All good. It seems I indeed misunderstood the sentence. I am all for
> standardizing the process and this sounds like a good addition. Though,
> this misunderstanding from my part makes it even more important IMHO to not
> send this out to the public (because others might misunderstand this in the
> same way I did).
>
> Cheers,
> Timo
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 5:24 PM Alessandro Pisa <alessandro.pisa at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Timo (and all) sorry if the invitation was not sent out, but I didn't
>> even see it coming that I was going to organize a FWT meeting.
>> We are trying to organize the FWT meeting in a more standard way.
>> Unluckily I did not see a lot of replies to my (pretty numerous)
>> emails on this mailing list and I (wrongly) assumed people were busy
>> with something else.
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 17:06, Timo Stollenwerk <tisto at plone.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Regarding the "proposal to decrease the amount of bureaucracy needed
>> for each PLIP". This is a pretty fundamental change in the mission of the
>> FWT. Even if that's just a proposal. I wouldn't include this in the meeting
>> notes TBH and discuss this in a meeting, when more than three members
>> attend (and with proper invitations send out).
>> >
>>
>> No problem,I am fine with not publishing that part.
>>
>> To give you some context, the goal was to not block PRs like the ones
>> reviewed in
>> https://gist.github.com/ale-rt/c02281561d55564af6794e5cbf6fe513.
>> They are pending since month, they have a proper review and we are not
>> able to complete the process.
>> Those PRs are really small and unluckily nobody replied to my mails
>> and no FWT meeting happened since a lot of time.
>>
>> I personally feel ashamed to block Maurits for such a small thing,
>> while huge changes (e.g. the Zope 5 adoption) happen in a way which is
>> exactly the one described in the proposal.
>>
>> > When a simple vote from two contributors is sufficient, we can just
>> close the FWT (which is a valid option if that is what we want).
>> >
>>
>> This sentence is a fallacy which I don't even want to start to comment by
>> mail.
>> Let's clarify this in the next FWT meeting :)
>>
>
This "valid option" was a reference to a discussion that was brought up in
the steering about the role of the framework team in the Plone community. I
just want to make clear that this is not my personal opinion.

Let's indeed discuss this face-to-face in the next FWT meeting. :)

Cheers,
Timo



>
>> Ciao and see you in two weeks!
>> --
>> @ale_pisa - http://ale-rt.github.io - http://alepisa.blogspot.com -
>> https://it.linkedin.com/in/apisa
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-framework-team/attachments/20200929/4774e0a6/attachment.html>