Vapier wrote: [Tue Apr 04 2006, 01:27:54AM EDT]
> On Monday 03 April 2006 19:35, Aron Griffis wrote:
> > I disagree with fast-tracking this to any official Gentoo
> > documentation.
>
> i never used the word "fast" ... where did it come from ?
Earlier you said:
Vapier wrote: [Mon Apr 03 2006, 05:38:48PM EDT]
> this is on track to be integrated as-is into the dev handbook
> Etiquette section
You're right, I introduced the word "fast" but it's what I thought you
meant by "on track to be integrated as-is". Sorry if I misunderstood.
> > > Be considerate. Your work will be used by other people, and you in
> > > turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you make will
> > > affect users and colleagues, and we expect you to take those
> > > consequences into account when making decisions.
> >
> > All of this is obvious, except for who is "we"?
>
> the Gentoo community ? your peers and loved ones ?
Ok, thanks for the clarification. IMHO "we expect" is patronizing,
which is unfortunately the overall tone of this document. I'm not
just whining here... I'm willing to offer alternative suggestions that
hopefull will drop that tone. For example, how does this sound
instead?
Be considerate. Your work is used by other people, and you in
turn depend on the work of others. Each decision you make affects
users and colleagues, so consider your choices carefully in light
of the consequences.
> > > Be respectful. The Gentoo community and its members treat one
> > > another with respect.
> >
> > Odd to make this declarative statement when it isn't true.
>
> this document now exists because this statement isnt true ... this is one
> part
> of a solution imo
Personally, I think your statement in another subthread regarding two
kinds of respect was more valuable than this questionable declaration.
You were wrong, though, regarding respect. Respect is always earned.
The term we need here is "grace", which refers to giving something
that isn't necessarily deserved. Here is my attempt at rewriting that
entire paragraph:
Be gracious. When a disagreement arises, the possibility exists
that you are wrong and the other person is right. Especially
when a situation is frustrating, you give the most to the Gentoo
community by responding humbly and patiently.
Personally I think this covers the bases. I don't think it's
necessary to detail who deserves this kind of treatment, the very
definition of grace implies that it applies to everybody.
I also like this because it's different from Ubuntu's document. That
isn't reason in itself, but it's nice to believe that we've carefully
chosen our words and eventually produced something that applies best
to Gentoo.
> > > Everyone can make a valuable contribution to Gentoo.
> >
> > They can? Making this kind of feel-good blanket statement just
> > detracts from the rest of this document.
>
> how so ? one of the critiques we have is that one jackass can turn off
> users/potential devs simply by their abrasive behavior. another critique is
> that some of us (i am guilty of this as well) of being too "snobbish" in
> terms of who can actually make useful contributions (generally if you have an
> @gentoo.org, that somehow "qualifies" you while those who do not are just
> meat). i recognize i'm a bit of a dick and i'm trying to change.
I took this out in my rewrite above. I'm not trying to deny that it's
a mindset that we should have, but IMHO it doesn't lend anything
beyond what has already been said. If you think it really needs to be
said, I can try to work it back in...
> > > We may not always agree, but disagreement is no excuse for
> > > poor behaviour and poor manners. We might all experience some
> > > frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to
> > > turn into a personal attacks. It's important to remember that
> > > a community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not
> > > a productive one.
> >
> > This should be shortened to say just what it means: Developers will
> > have more fun, be more productive, and create a better distribution if
> > we concentrate on the issues instead of resorting to personal attacks.
>
> i sort of like the longer winded version better ... really this paragraph
> shouldnt have to exist at all, but since it does, i like the version that
> spells out each detail clearly.
Heh, I don't see it as details, I see it as rambling and muddiness.
But you're right that my original attempt lost the concept. What do
you think of my new one ("Be gracious...")
> > > Be collaborative. Gentoo and Free Software are about collaboration
> > > and working together. Collaboration reduces redundancy of work done
> > > in the Free Software world, and improves the quality of the software
> > > produced. You should aim to collaborate with other Gentoo
> > > maintainers, as well as with the upstream community that is
> > > interested in the work you do. Your work should be done
> > > transparently and patches from Gentoo should be given back to the
> > > community when they are made, not just when the distribution
> > > releases. If you wish to work on new code for existing upstream
> > > projects, at least keep those projects informed of your ideas and
> > > progress. It may not be possible to get consensus from upstream or
> > > even from your colleagues about the correct implementation of an
> > > idea, so don't feel obliged to have that agreement before you begin,
> > > but at least keep the outside world informed of your work, and
> > > publish your work in a way that allows outsiders to test, discuss
> > > and contribute to your efforts.
> >
> > This part makes sense, I think... though I don't see the point of
> > codifying it except to "throw the book" at the next Paludis. Frankly
> > I think Ciaran did nothing wrong to restrict distribution on a project
> > he didn't feel was ready for public consumption. It has always seemed
> > to me like the overreactions were the problem.
>
> err, i dont see this interpretation at all ... how would this affect the
> Paludis work ? in anything, it codifies the work as being even "more" valid
>
> really though, this paragraph is not targeted at the Paludis project or
> Ciaran
> in any way ... not quite sure where this thought of yours is coming from
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
> > > When you disagree, consult others. Disagreements, both political and
> > > technical, happen all the time and the Gentoo community is no
> > > exception. The important goal is not to avoid disagreements or
> > > differing views but to resolve them constructively. You should turn
> > > to the community and to the community process to seek advice and to
> > > resolve disagreements. We have the Council, Infra, Devrel and Team
> > > Leaders all of which help you decide the right course for Gentoo.
> >
> > What do you mean by "turn to the community and to the community
> > process"? I'm not sure what that entails.
>
> we have a couple "standard" means of opening community discussion. irc,
> e-mail lists, forums, you name it.
>
> > And I'm really not sure I understand what the last sentence means.
>
> the idea is to provide some good examples of resources you can query for
> feedback ... perhaps tweak the sentence a little ?
Yeah, I'll try to think about it in a follow up. I need to do
a little work work now, instead of Gentoo work.
> > > Repeated disruptive behaviors will be viewed as a security and
> > > stability threat to Gentoo.
> >
> > Classic switching to the passive voice when the actor wishes to be
> > distanced from the action.
>
> please consider the document without these disciplinary related paragraphs as
> they belong elsewhere
Great, thanks.
Regards,
Aron
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
