[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-pim
Subject:    Re: RFC Nominate Cornelius for KDEPIM admin (was Re: [Kde-pim] KDE
From:       Michael Brade <brade () kde ! org>
Date:       2005-01-24 14:30:21
Message-ID: 200501241530.25421.brade () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Monday 24 January 2005 02:27, Don Sanders wrote:
> Having said that, I do understand your point. I apologize if I
> offended Michael.
No worries, I'm fine :-)

> But the number of examples is countless. Even this discussion is in a
> way an example of you mediating a discussion between myself and
> Michael. (e.g. I tend not to reply directly to Michael).
Yeah, I noticed. But why? Because you don't know what to answer? Because you 
don't like me? Because there's nothing to add to my mail and you agree? It 
doesn't really make much sense to give input on something if the input is 
just ignored for whatever reason. Neither does it make much sense to 
introduce something new and ignore all feedback.

> > What CVS privs? Our CVS doesn't _work_ like that. Except for admin/
> > and perhaps some www/ stuff, there's no ACLs, no vetting of folks,
>
> By CVS privs I mean CVS administrator privileges. That would for
> example allow code to be moved in or out of KDEPIM with the cvs logs
> being kept intact. (Which would assist in code migration).
>
> Also while I think all KDE cvs contributors should be allowed to
> contribute to KDEPIM by default. There needs to be some way for the
> local KDEPIM community to protect itself from troublesome
> individuals. So I am now pro having an ACL for KDEPIM.
Well, we had this discussion already regarding the whole of KDE. And the 
consensus was to not introduce ACLs because of the possibility to revert 
anything. There can't be done any permanent destruction. The exception is the 
web, which therefore got ACLs.

Furthermore, KDE just seems a bit more open and easier to grasp for newbies if 
there is no such thing as "You might cvs ci here and here but not here. And 
sometimes you might be able to cvs ci here as well, but you have to ask 
yadda." A simple "The maintainer decides" is enough.

And last, when everything is open everyone has to have a bit of respect and 
discipline. If anyone does anything wrong, all of us (well, almost ;) scream 
at him, it gets reverted and all is well and good again. On top of that, the 
committer learned a lesson. The people who still don't obey get their 
accounts closed. This worked well without problems up until now, I don't see 
a reason to change that.

> > and everyone commits to CVS on equal footing.
>
> Well, not entirely. For instance I recognize you as the kpilot guy and
> I wouldn't commit code to kpilot if I think it would upset you.
Yes, exactly. All of us think this way, I guess.

> I think this point is easy to ignore because it's a subtle one, but
> it's so important that a would be contributor understands these kinds
> of social subtleties before they begin interacting with others in the
> project.
Yep, most of the newbies learn that simply by watching kde-cvs.

> Community harmony is such a fragile thing and it requires so much
> effort to maintain, I think it requires more effort than writing the
> code at times.
As I said in my other mail, I think all it comes down to is egoism. As long as 
all of us have KDE and fun at the top of the priorities and the motives to 
act and the personal ego comes last, there will never be a real problem.

> > But what's that solve?
>
> Well what about people who aren't familiar with the KDEPIM package?
> IIRC there was a recent discussion on kde-core where a core developer
> claimed that there was no KDEPIM community that act as caretakers for
> the KDEPIM package. (I was a bit shocked by this, perhaps I
> misunderstood). What if a developer just ignores us and commits what
> they like to KDEPIM?
The maintainer of the respective code would simply revert. After all this is 
what we have maintainers for, don't we?

> He can only speak as one individual. So how can he tell someone else
> that they are doing something inappropriate?
Yes, everyone is more or less equal, this is what KDE is all about. (At least 
this is the way I perceive it). Thus everyone can tell this someone he's 
doing something wrong.

> The other party could 
> just see that as Cornelius engaging in individualistic abusive pro
> conflict behavior. And what incentive does anyone have to support
> Cornelius? What seemed to happen is that there was a deafening
> silence as everyone (understandably) avoided engaging in the
> discussion least their reputation be harmed.
>
> The danger I see is if other developers deny the existence of a KDEPIM
> community, and ignore the KDEPIM list, then it's just going to be a
> matter of time before they deny that you or I have any right
> whatsoever to control the code we created.
I think this is seen to negatively. Your fears didn't come true the last 5 
years and it is most likely to never happen.

> BTW I am actually working, just mainly in private. It just seems to be
> my nature to go off and do things by myself.
Hm. And this is written by someone who proactively advertises a community and 
cooperation? Heh, no offense, I just tripped over that... irony ;-)

Cheers,
-- 
Michael Brade;                 KDE Developer, Student of Computer Science
  |-mail: echo brade !#|tr -d "c oh"|s\e\d 's/e/\@/2;s/$/.org/;s/bra/k/2'
  °--web: http://www.kde.org/people/michaelb.html

KDE 3: The Next Generation in Desktop Experience

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
kde-pim mailing list
kde-pim@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
kde-pim home page at http://pim.kde.org/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]