Ate Douma
2014-01-20 12:40:24 UTC
Before anyone starts saying I'm overreacting or making this [1] into a too big
an issue, I think it is good for me to make my view clear in a separate thread.
As I said several times in the other mail thread [1], I don't disagree at all
with having and using the LinkedIn Jetspeed Portal group [2].
Although it is currently managed (owned) by a non-project (committer, PMC
member) user, which in itself is something to consider.
However, the Jetspeed community is really thin right now, and been for quite a
while. So if the intent is to revitalize the community, and I do think that is
the case, I think it is critical to consider how and where this is done.
Using additional means or outlets like David Taylor already said, like LinkedIn,
to allow the community to find each other definitely sounds fine by me.
But with a community so small, I do think it is critical to keep in mind how to
keep disparate outlets in 'sync' to prevent further separation of the community.
Using LinkedIn to bring more Jetspeed users together sounds good to me, but it
shouldn't result in them drifting further away from the 'root' community at
Apache.
I don't think the current 'issue' I reacted upon of inviting people to discuss
the Jetspeed roadmap on LinkedIn is all that serious. Its not as if there is
much discussion going on anyway.
So, I hope my feedback isn't regarded as overreacting or blowing things out of
proportions. The intent of my replies is merely in making aware of the
*potential* danger this *might* have in the future.
So again: I'm fine with the LinkedIn group as is.
But it should be noted that using it for discussions which can/might impact or
even be of interest to the Apache Jetspeed community as a whole can result in
other, non-LinkedIn users, become excluded, now or in the future.
Kind regards, Ate
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/portals-jetspeed-user/201401.mbox/%3C52DCFD55.3020302%40douma.nu%3E
[2] http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Jetspeed-Portal-3347198
an issue, I think it is good for me to make my view clear in a separate thread.
As I said several times in the other mail thread [1], I don't disagree at all
with having and using the LinkedIn Jetspeed Portal group [2].
Although it is currently managed (owned) by a non-project (committer, PMC
member) user, which in itself is something to consider.
However, the Jetspeed community is really thin right now, and been for quite a
while. So if the intent is to revitalize the community, and I do think that is
the case, I think it is critical to consider how and where this is done.
Using additional means or outlets like David Taylor already said, like LinkedIn,
to allow the community to find each other definitely sounds fine by me.
But with a community so small, I do think it is critical to keep in mind how to
keep disparate outlets in 'sync' to prevent further separation of the community.
Using LinkedIn to bring more Jetspeed users together sounds good to me, but it
shouldn't result in them drifting further away from the 'root' community at
Apache.
I don't think the current 'issue' I reacted upon of inviting people to discuss
the Jetspeed roadmap on LinkedIn is all that serious. Its not as if there is
much discussion going on anyway.
So, I hope my feedback isn't regarded as overreacting or blowing things out of
proportions. The intent of my replies is merely in making aware of the
*potential* danger this *might* have in the future.
So again: I'm fine with the LinkedIn group as is.
But it should be noted that using it for discussions which can/might impact or
even be of interest to the Apache Jetspeed community as a whole can result in
other, non-LinkedIn users, become excluded, now or in the future.
Kind regards, Ate
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/portals-jetspeed-user/201401.mbox/%3C52DCFD55.3020302%40douma.nu%3E
[2] http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Jetspeed-Portal-3347198