Replies are inline.
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Christopher O'Connell <jwritec...@gmail.com > wrote: > Was: Re: Reducing tickets queue > > Hello Ansible Community, > > When we stop contributing to an open source community, common courtesy > compels me to declare the causes of such action. > First off, Ansible is a top five project for the number of contributors this year. I'm not saying that because it's an accomplishment, I'm saying that's because that's what we are dealing with in terms of inputs. Massive data inputs. Huge flood. Loving it (most of the time). But that affects decisions we make. Let's go over the background involved in this controversy of responding to a rant about how we had become all evil and corporate: We recently made a move to implement GitHub issue templates that apparently was controversial to some, but I think it's totally the right thing to do as it saves a lot of repeated question entry. We're keeping that system and we had a thread to discuss it. It was largely positive. Another complaint is we almost always ask for discussion to happen on the lists and bugs to go to GitHub -- as that's how we work. There is much more community here and it allows for a more open exchange. There was another complaint in a way that seemed to be building up a case for me sucking about with_items behavior. We indicated our position on this, I think some disagree, but we also proposed a solution we would accept. I think that's all fine. And apparently I was a little efficient in various replies. Note I'm being crazy longwinded here. There have been people who have gotten offended occasionally because I wrote two sentences where I should have written four, but out of hundreds of thousands of users, I can count them on one hand. We don't use foul language or resort to the things that often gets Linus in trouble, and we don't call people stupid. Nearly all percieved "slight" or "personal attack" that has been claimed against me never was, but is usually due to one main problem -- we're humans on the internet, lacking social or vocal queues about a problem. I'd encourage people who have a laundry-list of disagreements to contact me personally, rather than claiming the project is someone out for nasty things and malice, and yes, I did try to nip that in the bud. I realize people react negatively to having diatribes removed at times, and that's probably not the way to deal with a problem. This is my fault. However, I also view Ansible as a community, and I like to clean up graffiti. We don't clean up "this could be better", but I don't think -- as a resource I put a lot of my time into maintaining -- this particular list is the place to accuse us of being nasty and evil, which is what happened last week. While open source communities are communities, these communities are not neccessarily open for free reign. There is a social contract that is required to participate. And ultimately, when folks make it an unhappy and unwelcome place, and I dread checking my email in the morning, we try to find and work with the folks we can work with. It doesn't apply 1:1, but there was a decent article about the takedown of Flappy Bird this morning that I liked. http://jeff-vogel.blogspot.com/2014/02/why-indie-developers-go-insane.html Ansible isn't going anywhere of course! But I think that may help you understand what he feels, and I feel sometime. And the assumption that I'm somehow out for blood is totally not the case, and when we say "you should talk about this on the list", it's because we believe in multicast communication as opposed to 1:1, so everybody can benefit and be involved. That being said, we're also not going to agree all of the time, and we will make judgement calls. That needs to be understood too, and that's how we try to keep ansible consistent. I think a lot of long term contributors will know we do debate things back and forth, and we can be made to come around given sufficient logic. So, while I hope you would contribute to Ansible, it's your prerogative to not to. And if any of the above makes me seem hypocritical, then I'd probably ask that you not to, as I don't like people assuming I'm being hypocritical when I'm trying to do the right thing in the face of a ginormous tidal wave. I will say straight up that we don't want all the code contributions coming in -- I think our accept rate is 65% or something like that. We ask for things to be revised. And that's why it's the software it is. For contributors that are new, I think they have to realize this is the community that created it, and it's never really been much different. We're going to make calls here and there -- because we've seen thousands of users doing different things and are acting in the interests of thousands of users, and some of those will be controversial. They are never done with anything but the best interests of the community at mind -- the whole community as an average. As Spock said, "the good of the many outweighs the needs of the one, or the few". In such cases, part of that, to me, is spending time writing good software and helping people versus dealing with drama from percieved slights that distract from creating good software. And I suspect most people here would believe that to be understandable and should at least be happy I'm not Linus (though I bet he's a great guy in person too) :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ansible Project" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ansible-project+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to ansible-project@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
