"Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:On Feb 23, 2005, at 9:53 AM, John D. Mitchell wrote:[...]
How are you seeing that manifest itself? Community is what Apache takes the most seriously. The codebase is 2nd to community. A thriving healthy community around a codebase is what the aim is.
No, you (and they :-) are confusing popularity with healthy. Those are
very different things.
No, you are confusing what the current state of these projects is and
what their _aim_ is! :) ASF aims for healthy, not necessarily popular.
Whether it achieves that aim is another story, but I was speaking of the
goal not necessarily the outcome, and those are often _two very different
things_.
Sorry, the proof is in the pudding. I.e., you can't take a
(self-)righteous position because you mean while your actions are evil.
The road to hell, as it were. I know, I know, "integrity" is a four-letter
word to the vast majority of people (who aren't merely indifferent). Sigh.
I'll be the first to claim that I really have no idea what the hell John is talking about in that last paragraph.
I as an individual don't speak for the ASF. All I'm quoting is the stated philosophy. Because real people are involved and many of the projects have little overlap and are islands and isolated communities, the same "real life" societal manifestations occur. Is the ASF a microcosm of the world, or is the world a projection of the ASF? It's all a matter of perspective and it being exactly what you want it to be :)
Take Tapestry for instance - its has not historically been that popular,
but it is an extraordinarily healthy and intelligent community. Flames
do not exist there, and everyone is very helpful, kind, and most are
quite brilliant.
Ah, see, one of the issues is that you're judging Tapestry's popularity
relativistically to other ASF projects rather than in real terms. That's
one of the fallacies that Microsoft suffers froms.
WTF? Tapestry is _not_ that popular. It's niche. There ought to be an amendment to Godwin's Law that says a thread is dead when M$ is mentioned :))
Anyways, as I stipulated, I'm willing to agree that there are some aberrant
projects that aren't lame and/or evil. :-)
Wouldn't evil imply intent? What open source projects (in or out of the ASF) do you feel are evil?
However, please note that the focus was on the ASF as an organization and
how their (lack of) leadership has failed the entire community.
Your handwaving and philosophizing is fun and all, but please bring it down to something concrete. Point out something specific please. Generalities aside (let's assume that a concrete issue *is* the generality for now :)
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
