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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: koffice
From:       "Aaron J. Seigo" <aseigo () kde ! org>
Date:       2011-02-02 20:33:16
Message-ID: 201102021233.17390.aseigo () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, Alfredo Beaumont wrote:
> Asteazkena 02 Otsaila 2011(e)an, Aaron J. Seigo(e)k idatzi zuen:
> > * people are wasting their own energy and putting the success of Calligra
> > and KOffice needlessly into jeopardy in the process
> > 
> > * they are spreading discontent throughout KDE with this approach to
> > things
> 
> I guess this is reciprocal. It's the KDE aproach to things which is causing
> all this problems and making people waste energy.

er, no. the koffice community created this situation quite on their own.  at 
this point, there is little that can be done from the outside to make it 
better other than trying to prevent it from spreading outwards to other areas 
of the community.

then again, maybe that was indeed part of the problem, if not in the way you 
meant it here. maybe KDE as a whole should have been able and willing to 
provide more support for koffice and their community issues over the last four 
(or whatever) years? maybe expecting effective leadership to be demonstrated 
in each individual team, even the larger ones, consistently over time is not 
realistic. and/or perhaps we're not doing enough to create and support 
effective leadership skills across KDE so that more teams can engage in 
direction setting and community maintenance in a healthy way.
 
is there anything that those who have been involved in this would have 
benefited from, say, 3 years ago that they didn't have access to? (hindsight 
is supposed to be 20-20, so let's see if we can take advantage of that ;)

> No sense for an arbitration process when there's no
> value in the arbitration topic.

the value is/was in keeping the problem contained and with a path to 
resolution so that it can eventually be put behind us. regardless of merit or 
value, making sure that:

* those involved do end up getting taken care of (they deserve it, as humans 
and as our friends)

* those not involved don't end up being impacted by it

is critical and worthwhile all on its own.

remember occurances like certain people showing up at GNOME conferences with 
"I Love Mono" stickers? that's the kind of divisive behaviour that happens 
when matters escalate unchecked. i don't want to see that happen in KDE, and 
so regardless of the value of the KOffice name, spending time on arbitration 
is worth it if only to try and keep harmony.

and yes, this is also why we're trying to stay vigilant about not letting 
these struggles spill out into other areas of KDE (e.V., sys admin, etc.)
 
> And yes, I agree with you, this is not good at all, but it's not unexpected
> at all, so maybe it should have been foreseen and thought about it more in
> depth.

hindsight is 20-20, but in this case it may have been foreseable, maybe as far 
back as 3+ years ago. i'm very interested in what we can learn from this 
particular history and how we can turn that into new tools for others to use 
in the future so that no one has to repeat this kind of exercise in our 
community again. (ok, perhaps moderately unrealistic to expect that sort of 
perfection, but we can try, right? :)

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel


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