[haiku-development] Re: [haiku] Re: V\OS Project Announcement (Haiku on linux)
- From: Dario Casalinuovo <b.vitruvio@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 09:48:24 +0200
Hi Adrien,
There was no vote, because the project works by reaching a common opinion
after discussing
the matters, not by voting and putting the "yes" and "no" camps against
each other, unless
we really can't achieve that (it happens very rarely).
Why do you continue repeating and repeating this stuff over and over in
forums and mailing lists?
Don't take it as an attack, it seems you are trying to convince yourself
of
that.
I have to tell it over and over again because people keep assuming that
Haiku Inc is in the power of deciding anything for the project, or that
there is some secret agenda and people taking decisions outside of
public view. I don't need to convince myself, but I'm interested in
learning from other people why they reached different conclusions, to
identify places where we can improve.
Am I the first person to complain about that? Over time I suggested a
variety of things that can be done to improve the project.
Sincerely, my impression is that you are constantly under the fear to lose
control of the project and that the project goes on a different direction
than you like.
At that time we reached the conclusion that a private mailing list
would
be a bad idea,
This is the worst idea I have ever heard in this project. This is really
a
childish idea, hope who proposed it is reading.
You are being insulting and this is unappropriate. Calling something the
"worst idea ever" and "childish".
If he gets offended, let it be. You could have said that my behavior in the
other post was childish, and you have been right.
I was bad at handling communication, and that's it. For me offending
someone is actually using offending words. I just expressed a similar
concept here, reacting to the Sia Long post this way is definitely immature
IMHO and a weak sign for the project.
It is important that everyone can give their opinion and voice their
concerns. Someone with a different background (for example working on
projects with a different organization) suggested this because it worked
for some of these other projects.
I am pretty sure this organization is a very big one, which has tons of
emails each day.
This is not our situation.
Posts like mine should be welcome because creates hype and interest in the
project.
The project is just good at cutting hype and enthusiasm of people, IMHO.
We discussed the idea, and quickly
reached the conclusion that it was not suitable to Haiku, which wants to
operate in a more open way. But we don't have to be insulting to the
person suggesting the idea. It would indeed solve the problem at hand;
only it would create more problems and these were identified while
discussing.
Please be careful about showing respect to other people.
Since when telling that a proposal is the worst idea ever is insulting?
That's just an opinion.
Some people may say that delaying beta was the worst idea ever for this
project, do you feel insulted?
That means you probably got caught in the right point. I don't know if
childish is an insult in English, but in my language that means basically
reacting in an immature way. If you feel it as an insult, I don't know, we
may just speak completely different idioms.
As said in another post, whenever people pointed out issues in my code, I
promptly fixed them apologizing for the distraction. The first time I
pointed out an honest issue with the code, I didn't get the same respect.
You even turned backward the thing saying that should I done the work?
OK, now I am going to do an ABI breakage and tell you "I made the damage,
but fix it yourself".
As stated in past, my impression is that every time a discussion goes in
directions you don't like, you begin accusing people of using hard words. I
don't know if at begeistert you are used to smoke cigars in a armchair, and
drink tea at 5:00 PM discussing the critique of pure reason, if that's the
case, sorry we are so distant in seeing the world that nothing good can be
get from any mediation between me and you.
But note: it is not the first time make similar complaints.
so we just did not create it, and that if people wanted to discuss things
with a restricted
set of people, they already had e-mail address from everyone, and
doing it
this way reminds
them that contacting a subset of people directly and privately should
be
kept for very specific
cases where going public is not desirable.
I will not care about what you and your 2-3 friends that were at this
coding sprint decided on behalf of the project.
You argument isn't valid in any way. You could tell me that at this
coding
sprint, you decided anything.
I will never be subject to anything you decide there. So I will not
continue anymore this silly discussion, everything you said is
substantially pointless.
Discussing this privately was a mistake, but I can't fix it now. I can
only tell you what I remember happened there. Now if you don't trust me,
what can I do about that? Why would I be lying to you? I'm just trying
to explain how things are, not to defend some establishment or whatever.
You still to miss to get my point, maybe because I may not be clear.
It's not that I am not going to believe you or think you are dishonest.
It's that you are telling me I should respect some decision:
* Not taken publicly
* No notice
* Taken by a fairly minor subset of the people with commit access
But you continue to argue the contrary. This just shows that you are
actually acting as a oligarchy of people controlling the project.
The only fact that on a attitude level you kind of said me I have to follow
this decision, just shows that I am right.
Now, I am pretty sure Alexander was not present at this BeGeistert. So I
can hypotize two things:
* You actually discussed the thing privately with other devs not present at
this event, but not with the whole community. Hence, shows the fact that
you are deciding things like an oligarchy and pretend this decision is
widely accepted by people. That's because how you behaved, you behaved like
it was voted and decided definitely that this topics should be avoided.
* Alexander didn't know anything about that. You stepped up in defending
him, by citing this discussion again enforcing an act in a unqualified way.
That shows a non democratic behavior, where once someone does something you
don't like you tell "we discussed this at the coding sprint".
Nonetheless, this creates a very bad precedent in which you could tell me
that you discussed whatever. This is a very bad precedent, and you should
just not have used this reasoning.
Either way, doesn't seem respectful not only on me, but on the whole
project. Sorry, but your logic has contradictions everywhere.
I know a lot of things are imperfect in the way we do things, to name a
few:
- The rules for how the Haiku project is run are still not really
written in anywhere easily accessible (there are some attempts in the
mailing list archive, but they are hard to find and don't necessarily
reflect the current state),
- Haiku inc is in trouble and needs to be reformed with better bylaws.
There is work going on to fix this, but it is SLOW (as with anything
involving the inc),
- And sometimes it happens that we discuss things at lunchtime during
coding sprints. But what are we supposed to do? Eat silently, just in
case someone would say something important? Record everything for
public archives? Also this happens just once a year, so it can't be
the most pressing issue?
You should not pretend that what you discuss it is law for the project.
Discussing the decisions in the proper place, where the proper rights are
warranted is **fundamental** in modern greek-roman derived democracy.
Nonetheless announcing decisions is mandatory in modern constitutions.
Think of it. Seriously. At the bare bone level, this is really the core of
democracy.
You don't discute openly, and more important you are democratic only when
this advantages your likes.
We are democratic when the usual way does not work. Voting is a last
resort when we can't reach a concensus. The usual way is we discuss
things together and reach a common decision. Nowhere we wrote or said
"Haiku is a democracy". You may think this is unfair, but at least we
are honest about it.
And I discuss things openly right here, right now. Except your reply is
"I won't listen to you and I don't care what you say". What can I do then?
The whole point is that you used this discussion at the code sprint like it
was something mandatory that I should respect. I don't agree with that,
completely. Seen in this light, you and Alexander are abusing of your
power, my two cents.
--
Saluti,
Dario
Other related posts:
