[openbeos] Re: Openness

  • From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 16:10:56 +0200 CEST

Hi Hugo,

"Hugo Santos" <hugosantos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>   My main point, and from your reply i would say you disagree with 
> it,
> is that new people won't contribute as significantly to something 
> they
> can't have a say about. This is basic human behavior and dynamics. An
> OSS project participant works in his/hers free time, and as such one
> looks to spend it in the most fruitful way for oneself. Not being 
> able
> to stear the wheel, ends up being a bit like a company, with the
> difference that you may work on what you want, as long as the people
> in the admin team agree. I don't think this approach leads to having
> new people aboard, and the project history speaks for itself -- most
> of the work has been done by a small set of people which are there
> since the beginning.

1) the fact that most work was done by few people surely has many 
reasons and IMO cannot be used to support your argument
2) who would expect to have a say in a large project from the day on he 
decides to contribute to that project? It cannot work this way.
3) we still have mostly the same people because they are committed to 
the success of Haiku - that's not a disadvantage.
4) everyone who contributes may become part of the admin group - it's 
not a closed club. In fact, we had several fluctuations, and not 
everyone was there from the start (not even me), and a number of people 
have left since the project was started.

>   You didn't reply to my points regarding trust, which are largely
> related with what i just talked about, so it's hard to put it whether
> you are concerned about it or not. I think those points are very
> important.

Trust is hard to measure. It obviously plays a role in selecting the 
members of the admin group, but trust (in your commitment) will come 
automatically when you're a long term contributor. It's not even that 
everyone in the current admin group was invited; some just asked, and 
that's probably the best way to actually get into the group.

> > A small group works much more effectively if they know each other 
> > well
> > - but of course, this will only work to a certain point.
>   People handling is always a difficult task. The effectiveness of a
> group is not dictated by how well the people know each other, but how
> easily an agreement can be established. A group should be run on the
> basis of respect, on respecting each person in the group and value
> their opinion. Reaching an agreement means, most of the time, not
> forcing our own opinion fully in order to reach a compromise.

You're right, knowing each other is just helpful in this regard :-)

> > That's why it is important that Haiku Inc. is acting as part of 
> > Haiku.
> > The distribution guidelines were discussed and agreed upon in the 
> > whole
> > admin group.
>   You missed the point. The admin team decided and now you will
> enforce a set of restrictions on _everyone_ developer's contribution.
> Stating that the code can not be used in a certain way effectively
> changes the license concerning derivative work and/or redistribution.
> I'm sure some people who have contributed in the past haven't had
> their position taken into account in that admin team decision.

No sorry, you missed the point of what the distribution guidelines are 
about: the code is free, and its license hasn't changed. Only the use 
of the name "Haiku" (and other *trademarks*) is restricted by this 


Other related posts: