Before I reply to various points, let me preface by saying my interest
is only in seeing Django succeed, because as a long time Csound user, I
have watched less than ideal open source management push away really
talented developers and result in unproductive fork wars. So it is not
personal.

> If I were going to make up a list of "core developers" I think only
> two or three of them even live in the same time zone as Kansas, and in
> several cases I'd be pulling in people who don't live on the same
> continent.
> 
> So if we're going to talk about misconceptions, let's throw that one
> out right away ;)

Ok, this is where you are IMHO wrong. You don't get to choose which
misconceptions you throw out. The perceptions are there, obviously, or
there wouldn't be blog postings about it, and you saying they are wrong
accomplishes nothing. The people who have the perceptions aren't reading
this or the blogs. Like I said, I'm *not* talking about what the truth
is, but what the *perception* is. And these things don't happen for no
reason. The misconceptions exist because of various factors, but if
django wants to achieve a fantastic dev community on the order of the
linux kernel and such like, then the root *reasons* need to be
addressed. Rebutting does no one any good.

Django is an example of a closed project that was then opened, which has
many advantages ( very cohesive code base, clean unified design, already
tested, etc ) but disadvantages too. Overcoming the *perception* of
closed doors and adjusting dev practices to greater openness being the
biggest ones.

> 1. The dev list gets an awful lot of traffic from people who should be
> mailing django-users instead. I'm not trying to belittle anyone or any
> particular issue, but Django seems to get a lot more general support
> traffic on its dev list than other projects I've seen. That has a
> negative impact on the signal-to-noise ratio of the list.

This may be true. However, it's not pertinent to my point, which was
that there is not enough discussion *relative to the level of coding
going on*. My comments had nothing to do with the signal to noise ratio.
As a side note though, I have also seen posts go ignored when a short
reply redirecting to say ticket instructions would be better.

> 2. The core developers tend to be extremely efficient at using
> conferences and other organized events as a way to come together and
> discuss/work on Django. Things which would take ages to work out on a
> mailing list can be resolved in a matter of hours in a conference room
> at PyCon or OSCon, and in fact that tends to happen a lot. Generally,
> when that happens people post followups publicly somewhere, though the
> followups often appear on blogs; I think that's an acceptable thing to
> do. Adrian also does a great job of posting news to the official blog
> when appropriate.

Ok, on this point, I totally disagree. This is exactly what I mean, that
is 100% an example of closed dev policy. There are scads of super smart
python developers who might contribute but for very legitimate reasons
will never be able to attend conferences. And blog summaries are not the
same thing at all as discussion on a dev list. Yes, things get worked
out faster in meetings, but at the cost of being out of view, and that
really is the rub. Speed vs transparency. You have a choice in FLOSS
development, you can choose to close doors and be more efficient, or
spend more time to attract more developers and get the payoff of a
larger coding base later. It will always cost more in time to attract
more developers because it means better documentation is needed and
discussions need to take longer. I believe ( and I'm not the only one )
that choosing speed over transparency is not a good plan. If Django as a
community feels otherwise, that's their perogative. But they will lose
potential developers over it. Fogel has a very thorough discussion on
exactly this in his book. If you haven't read it, I recommend it, he
makes the point a bazillion times better than I can.

> then appears for public discussion. Dev threads pop up when something
> hits a snag; several of our core devs are like well-behaved Unix
> processes that only print output when something goes wrong ;)

Again, I don't that is a good model for *attracting development*. 

> I guess I'm wondering what exactly we're perceived as not being open
> about, and I'd be interested to hear examples; we've got open branches
> and some experimental things like Oracle/MS-SQL support going, but
> we've been very up-front about the fact that those can't really go
> forward without people stepping up to help test and debug them (I've
> lost track of the number of times I've said exactly that, on *both*
> Django lists). The new forms and the model subclassing stuff have been
> discussed repeatedly and at length on the dev list.

Well, I guess it's a question of whether the core want to adjust further
towards a more open policy. It takes more work, and the payoff comes
later. It's the Cathedral and Bazaar thing again, and who the heck runs
the Herd? All I'm really saying is that right now the perception exists
for a reason that joining django development would be difficult and
people lurking and trying to decide whether to work on it aren't near as
likely to jump in as they could be. And we need to remember that the
goal is not for our team to kick everyones butt, because someone can
always come and fork your project. If the code is so good that everyone
wants to use it but a bunch of smart people feel that they can't
properly get in on the action, they'll fork, and nobody really wins from
that. 

I like Django more than Gears because of the clean cohesive code, makes
it easier to get going. But if I were seriously looking for one to
develop on, I'm not sure I'd pick Django. And I'm also not sure that I
would bet on Django being better than Gears in another few years. Apache
took a looong time to really get going. So did the kernel. Now they
improve so fast it's ridiculous.
  
I'm sure I have made my point enough though so I'll shut up and go back
to web sites. ;)

Iain




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to