Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
dr scofield wrote: to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent of the "money" discussions). It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the rest of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases an addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is not something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, but clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and hence it should be discussed not ignored. Crista ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
Sorry this went to the -dev list by mistake. Please ignore. ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes wrote: > dr scofield wrote: > > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent > of the "money" discussions). > > > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the rest > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases an > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is not > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, but > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and hence it > should be discussed not ignored. > > Crista Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential human catastrophe. :D Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P Cheers, ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
There's a secret mailing list to discuss such issue? Wow. That's interesting. I feel like Ryan now too. -Original Message- From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:26 PM To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes wrote: > dr scofield wrote: > > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent > of the "money" discussions). > > > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the rest > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases an > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is not > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, but > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and hence it > should be discussed not ignored. > > Crista Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential human catastrophe. :D Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P Cheers, ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
there is no secret mailing list, i don't know what he is talking about I suspect that email came from the opensim-users email list. Lets not keep feeding this thread, Crista asked everyone to ignore it. so lets not have this blow up, its not related to OpenSimulator development. On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Kyle G wrote: > There's a secret mailing list to discuss such issue? Wow. That's > interesting. I feel like Ryan now too. > > -Original Message- > From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de > [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall > Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:26 PM > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes > wrote: > > dr scofield wrote: > > > > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent > > of the "money" discussions). > > > > > > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, > > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that > > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the > rest > > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care > > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases > an > > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on > > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is > not > > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, > but > > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and hence > it > > should be discussed not ignored. > > > > Crista > > Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political > disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the > kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential > human catastrophe. :D > > Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... > Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without > voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P > > Cheers, > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > -- Michael Emory Cerquoni - Nebadon Izumi @ http://osgrid.org ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
It's opensim-core, and it's limited to core developers only. They say they don't discuss anything cool, but I still never liked it, and retain my right granted by freedom of speech to register that objection. However, Nebadon is right, there is no point in making it a "thing". This project (and any other popular project) has it's share of bike-shedding as it is. Ask yourself: do you *really* want to join a flame war about crazy global-warming-licenses? :) Cheers, On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Nebadon Izumi wrote: > there is no secret mailing list, i don't know what he is talking about I > suspect that email came from the opensim-users email list. Lets not keep > feeding this thread, Crista asked everyone to ignore it. so lets not have > this blow up, its not related to OpenSimulator development. > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Kyle G wrote: >> >> There's a secret mailing list to discuss such issue? Wow. That's >> interesting. I feel like Ryan now too. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de >> [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:26 PM >> To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions >> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes >> wrote: >> > dr scofield wrote: >> > >> > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent >> > of the "money" discussions). >> > >> > >> > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, >> > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that >> > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the >> > rest >> > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care >> > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases >> > an >> > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on >> > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is >> not >> > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, >> but >> > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and >> > hence >> it >> > should be discussed not ignored. >> > >> > Crista >> >> Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political >> disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the >> kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential >> human catastrophe. :D >> >> Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... >> Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without >> voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P >> >> Cheers, >> ___ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> >> >> ___ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > -- > Michael Emory Cerquoni - Nebadon Izumi @ http://osgrid.org > > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
As far as there being opensim-core, yes. It exists. As far as it being Secret.. it's not ..Nor it it intended to be secret. It's been discussed before on IRC and in previous e-mail on opensim-dev. It has OpenSimulator core as it's members. It has a purpose as well, Just to be clear: * The core list is a list where interpersonal and political issues between the core developers are discussed. Despite how it may appear, we don't always agree on everything or even like each other from time to time. We would prefer to keep this interpersonal drama from distracting development. * The core list is also where core actions are decided upon, like voting on a new user's entry into core * We also discuss opensimulator.org server configurations (like using git for our repository) * Discussing the Development of OpenSimulator, however, is not appropriate in opensim-core. That's what opensim-dev is for. We also have a core IRC channel #opensim-core on freenode where the same rules apply. Regards Teravus On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Nebadon Izumi wrote: > there is no secret mailing list, i don't know what he is talking about I > suspect that email came from the opensim-users email list. Lets not keep > feeding this thread, Crista asked everyone to ignore it. so lets not have > this blow up, its not related to OpenSimulator development. > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Kyle G wrote: >> >> There's a secret mailing list to discuss such issue? Wow. That's >> interesting. I feel like Ryan now too. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de >> [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:26 PM >> To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions >> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes >> wrote: >> > dr scofield wrote: >> > >> > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent >> > of the "money" discussions). >> > >> > >> > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, >> > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that >> > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the >> > rest >> > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care >> > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases >> > an >> > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on >> > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is >> not >> > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, >> but >> > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and >> > hence >> it >> > should be discussed not ignored. >> > >> > Crista >> >> Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political >> disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the >> kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential >> human catastrophe. :D >> >> Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... >> Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without >> voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P >> >> Cheers, >> ___ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> >> >> ___ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > -- > Michael Emory Cerquoni - Nebadon Izumi @ http://osgrid.org > > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
I'm not upset just a bit concerned is all... -Original Message- From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 3:06 PM To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions It's opensim-core, and it's limited to core developers only. They say they don't discuss anything cool, but I still never liked it, and retain my right granted by freedom of speech to register that objection. However, Nebadon is right, there is no point in making it a "thing". This project (and any other popular project) has it's share of bike-shedding as it is. Ask yourself: do you *really* want to join a flame war about crazy global-warming-licenses? :) Cheers, On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Nebadon Izumi wrote: > there is no secret mailing list, i don't know what he is talking about I > suspect that email came from the opensim-users email list. Lets not keep > feeding this thread, Crista asked everyone to ignore it. so lets not have > this blow up, its not related to OpenSimulator development. > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Kyle G wrote: >> >> There's a secret mailing list to discuss such issue? Wow. That's >> interesting. I feel like Ryan now too. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de >> [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:26 PM >> To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions >> >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes >> wrote: >> > dr scofield wrote: >> > >> > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent >> > of the "money" discussions). >> > >> > >> > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, >> > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that >> > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the >> > rest >> > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care >> > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases >> > an >> > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on >> > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is >> not >> > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, >> but >> > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and >> > hence >> it >> > should be discussed not ignored. >> > >> > Crista >> >> Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political >> disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the >> kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential >> human catastrophe. :D >> >> Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... >> Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without >> voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P >> >> Cheers, >> ___ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> >> >> ___ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > -- > Michael Emory Cerquoni - Nebadon Izumi @ http://osgrid.org > > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
Ryan McDougall wrote: On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes wrote: dr scofield wrote: to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department (reminiscent of the "money" discussions). It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't care, this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to that stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of the rest of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of us care about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who releases an addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case based on country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual orientation,...) is not something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do about it, but clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, and hence it should be discussed not ignored. Crista Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of potential human catastrophe. :D Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P i'd like to add that this has nothing to do with OpenSim per se. the "eccentric license" referred to relates to a third party component. cheers, DrS/dirk -- dr dirk husemann math & computer science ibm zurich research lab RL: h...@zurich.ibm.com - +41 44 724 8573 - http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~hud/ SL: drscofi...@xyzzyxyzzy.net - http://xyzzyxyzzy.net/ ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions
Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are fairly low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' or 'meta' matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more than 5 committers for the committers to have a mailing list for these purposes, since realtime chats aren't practical across timezones. Adam > -Original Message- > From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev- > boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Teravus Ovares > Sent: Monday, 19 October 2009 12:22 PM > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions > > As far as there being opensim-core, yes. It exists. As far as it > being Secret.. it's not ..Nor it it intended to be secret. > It's been discussed before on IRC and in previous e-mail on > opensim-dev. It has OpenSimulator core as it's members. > > It has a purpose as well, > Just to be clear: > > * The core list is a list where interpersonal and political issues > between the core developers are discussed. Despite how it may > appear, we don't always agree on everything or even like each other > from time to time. We would prefer to keep this interpersonal drama > from distracting development. > > * The core list is also where core actions are decided upon, like > voting on a new user's entry into core > > * We also discuss opensimulator.org server configurations (like using > git for our repository) > > * Discussing the Development of OpenSimulator, however, is not > appropriate in opensim-core. That's what opensim-dev is for. > > We also have a core IRC channel #opensim-core on freenode where the > same rules apply. > > Regards > > Teravus > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Nebadon Izumi > wrote: > > there is no secret mailing list, i don't know what he is talking > about I > > suspect that email came from the opensim-users email list. Lets not > keep > > feeding this thread, Crista asked everyone to ignore it. so lets not > have > > this blow up, its not related to OpenSimulator development. > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Kyle G > wrote: > >> > >> There's a secret mailing list to discuss such issue? Wow. That's > >> interesting. I feel like Ryan now too. > >> > >> -Original Message- > >> From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de > >> [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan > McDougall > >> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 2:26 PM > >> To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > >> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] [opensim-core] snowcrash's contributions > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Cristina Videira Lopes > >> wrote: > >> > dr scofield wrote: > >> > > >> > to me this is another piece from the legal FUD department > (reminiscent > >> > of the "money" discussions). > >> > > >> > > >> > It's very easy to brush difficult issues under the rug of "I don't > care, > >> > this is ethics, not technical, hence it's FUD". You're entitled to > that > >> > stand. Give your -1 on whatever is being proposed and stay out of > the > >> > rest > >> > of the conversation, instead of trying to "FUD the FUD." Some of > us care > >> > about these difficult issues. Having a co-copyright holder who > releases > >> > an > >> > addon to opensim under a discriminatory license (in this case > based on > >> > country, but could be based on race, gender, sexual > orientation,...) is > >> not > >> > something some of us can ignore. Unclear if/what we should do > about it, > >> but > >> > clear that this is bugging a lot of people, not just core devs, > and > >> > hence > >> it > >> > should be discussed not ignored. > >> > > >> > Crista > >> > >> Nationality, or more to the point of the clause, political > >> disposition, can be changed; unlike race or gender -- which is the > >> kind of the point, to make a political stand in the face of > potential > >> human catastrophe. :D > >> > >> Have I mentioned that I'm not a fan of the secret mailing list? ... > >> Here I am feeling like a member of a community, but largely without > >> voice on the crucial matter of eccentric licenses(?)! :P > >> > >> Cheers, > >> ___ > >> Opensim-dev mailing list > >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> Opensim-dev mailing list > >> Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > >> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > > > -- > > Michael Emory Cerquoni - Nebadon Izumi @ http://osgrid.org > > > > ___ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailma
[Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Frisby, Adam wrote: > Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are fairly > low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' or 'meta' > matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. > > It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more than 5 > committers for the committers to have a mailing list for these purposes, > since realtime chats aren't practical across timezones. > > Adam > I am not sure I'd agree just how standard a process it is. The one's I've been involved with or otherwise have some detailed knowledge of, have never had them; including such big names as GNOME, Fedora, and Linux. For example the GNOME foundation list is not only world-readable, but anyone can join: http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list . Actual foundation members are voted by the community at large. Basically the way they are able to operate is, they don't distribute commit access according to monolithic vote of knighted members; they have a system of maintainership, and each maintainer gives access rights to his module/repo as she sees fit, in a web of trust. One of the complaints one sometimes hears is how monolithic the project is (even if the code-base is modular). Maybe the move to git, and the maturation of the code allows more distribution and specialization of responsibility? My concerns with core mailing list are: 1. It's "secret", ie. not world readable. I can understand limiting membership to voting partners to avoid bikeshedding, but I can't understand secrecy of any kind in an open source project. 2. Decisions made there (aside from commit rights) affect other people, and they not only have no voice to represent themselves, they don't even get to know what is being said about them. That doesn't seem fair somehow. The knowledge that someone can read what you write makes you think harder about what you say. Maybe a private list makes the problem of disagreement within core worse rather than better? I haven't the faintest idea who this snowcrash guy is, but when I was a topic of discussion on -core, I remember not liking it at all. As for the issue of timezones, I understand that completely! Which is why I wish you guys used ML more frequently! :) My intention is not to bike-shed, but to be productive. Either opensim core is open to this point of view or it's not, and we move on from there. Cheers, and much love! ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
Well said especially the "much love"-if we see far it is because we stand on the shoulders of virtual giants... ReactionGrid Mobile On Oct 20, 2009, at 12:32 AM, Ryan McDougall wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Frisby, Adam > wrote: >> Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are >> fairly low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' >> or 'meta' matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. >> >> It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more >> than 5 committers for the committers to have a mailing list for >> these purposes, since realtime chats aren't practical across >> timezones. >> >> Adam >> > > I am not sure I'd agree just how standard a process it is. > > The one's I've been involved with or otherwise have some detailed > knowledge of, have never had them; including such big names as GNOME, > Fedora, and Linux. For example the GNOME foundation list is not only > world-readable, but anyone can join: > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list . Actual > foundation members are voted by the community at large. > > Basically the way they are able to operate is, they don't distribute > commit access according to monolithic vote of knighted members; they > have a system of maintainership, and each maintainer gives access > rights to his module/repo as she sees fit, in a web of trust. > > One of the complaints one sometimes hears is how monolithic the > project is (even if the code-base is modular). Maybe the move to git, > and the maturation of the code allows more distribution and > specialization of responsibility? > > My concerns with core mailing list are: > > 1. It's "secret", ie. not world readable. I can understand limiting > membership to voting partners to avoid bikeshedding, but I can't > understand secrecy of any kind in an open source project. > > 2. Decisions made there (aside from commit rights) affect other > people, and they not only have no voice to represent themselves, they > don't even get to know what is being said about them. That doesn't > seem fair somehow. > > The knowledge that someone can read what you write makes you think > harder about what you say. Maybe a private list makes the problem of > disagreement within core worse rather than better? I haven't the > faintest idea who this snowcrash guy is, but when I was a topic of > discussion on -core, I remember not liking it at all. > > As for the issue of timezones, I understand that completely! Which is > why I wish you guys used ML more frequently! :) > > My intention is not to bike-shed, but to be productive. Either opensim > core is open to this point of view or it's not, and we move on from > there. > > Cheers, and much love! > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
Sry iPod touch spazzed on email send... ReactionGrid Mobile On Oct 20, 2009, at 12:32 AM, Ryan McDougall wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Frisby, Adam > wrote: >> Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are >> fairly low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' >> or 'meta' matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. >> >> It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more >> than 5 committers for the committers to have a mailing list for >> these purposes, since realtime chats aren't practical across >> timezones. >> >> Adam >> > > I am not sure I'd agree just how standard a process it is. > > The one's I've been involved with or otherwise have some detailed > knowledge of, have never had them; including such big names as GNOME, > Fedora, and Linux. For example the GNOME foundation list is not only > world-readable, but anyone can join: > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list . Actual > foundation members are voted by the community at large. > > Basically the way they are able to operate is, they don't distribute > commit access according to monolithic vote of knighted members; they > have a system of maintainership, and each maintainer gives access > rights to his module/repo as she sees fit, in a web of trust. > > One of the complaints one sometimes hears is how monolithic the > project is (even if the code-base is modular). Maybe the move to git, > and the maturation of the code allows more distribution and > specialization of responsibility? > > My concerns with core mailing list are: > > 1. It's "secret", ie. not world readable. I can understand limiting > membership to voting partners to avoid bikeshedding, but I can't > understand secrecy of any kind in an open source project. > > 2. Decisions made there (aside from commit rights) affect other > people, and they not only have no voice to represent themselves, they > don't even get to know what is being said about them. That doesn't > seem fair somehow. > > The knowledge that someone can read what you write makes you think > harder about what you say. Maybe a private list makes the problem of > disagreement within core worse rather than better? I haven't the > faintest idea who this snowcrash guy is, but when I was a topic of > discussion on -core, I remember not liking it at all. > > As for the issue of timezones, I understand that completely! Which is > why I wish you guys used ML more frequently! :) > > My intention is not to bike-shed, but to be productive. Either opensim > core is open to this point of view or it's not, and we move on from > there. > > Cheers, and much love! > ___ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
I disagree. * Commit Rights - those discussions cannot occur in public (although the discussion archives are open to committers after being invited), the reason for this is no-one can be frank & honest without hurting people's feelings. --- >From the excellent F/OSS guidebook: >http://producingoss.com/en/consensus-democracy.html#electorate "The voting system itself should be used to choose new committers, both full and partial. But here is one of the rare instances where secrecy is appropriate. You can't have votes about potential committers posted to a public mailing list, because the candidate's feelings (and reputation) could be hurt. Instead, the usual way is that an existing committer posts to a private mailing list consisting only of the other committers, proposing that someone be granted commit access. The other committers speak their minds freely, knowing the discussion is private. Often there will be no disagreement, and therefore no vote necessary. After waiting a few days to make sure every committer has had a chance to respond, the proposer mails the candidate and offers him commit access. If there is disagreement, discussion ensues as for any other question, possibly resulting in a vote. For this process to be open and frank, the mere fact that the discussion is taking place at all should be secret . If the person under consideration knew it was going on, and then were never offered commit access, he could conclude that he had lost the vote, and would likely feel hurt. Of course, if someone explicitly asks for commit access, then there is no choice but to consider the proposal and explicitly accept or reject him. If the latter, then it should be done as politely as possible, with a clear explanation: "We liked your patches, but haven't seen enough of them yet," or "We appreciate all your patches, but they required considerable adjustments before they could be applied, so we don't feel comfortable giving you commit access yet. We hope that this will change over time, though." Remember, what you're saying could come as a blow, depending on the person's level of confidence. Try to see it from their point of view as you write the mail." --- I personally suggest reading that whole chapter (#4) for reasons why a lot of projects have a committers mailing list (and yes it is a standard practice.) Adam > -Original Message- > From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev- > boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall > Sent: Monday, 19 October 2009 9:33 PM > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core" > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Frisby, Adam > wrote: > > Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are fairly > low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' or 'meta' > matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. > > > > It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more > than 5 committers for the committers to have a mailing list for these > purposes, since realtime chats aren't practical across timezones. > > > > Adam > > > > I am not sure I'd agree just how standard a process it is. > > The one's I've been involved with or otherwise have some detailed > knowledge of, have never had them; including such big names as GNOME, > Fedora, and Linux. For example the GNOME foundation list is not only > world-readable, but anyone can join: > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list . Actual > foundation members are voted by the community at large. > > Basically the way they are able to operate is, they don't distribute > commit access according to monolithic vote of knighted members; they > have a system of maintainership, and each maintainer gives access > rights to his module/repo as she sees fit, in a web of trust. > > One of the complaints one sometimes hears is how monolithic the > project is (even if the code-base is modular). Maybe the move to git, > and the maturation of the code allows more distribution and > specialization of responsibility? > > My concerns with core mailing list are: > > 1. It's "secret", ie. not world readable. I can understand limiting > membership to voting partners to avoid bikeshedding, but I can't > understand secrecy of any kind in an open source project. > > 2. Decisions made there (aside from commit rights) affect other > people, and they not only have no voice to represent themselves, they > don't even get to know what is being said about them. That doesn't > seem fair somehow. > > The knowledge that someone can read what you write makes you think > harder about what you say. Maybe a private list makes the problem of > disagreement within core worse rather than better? I haven't the > faintest idea who this snowcrash guy is, but when I was a topic of > discussion on -core, I remember not liking it at all. > > As for the issue of timezones, I understand that completely! Which is >
Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
Makes sense as well thanks Adam for the resource -Original Message- From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Frisby, Adam Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 1:28 AM To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core" I disagree. * Commit Rights - those discussions cannot occur in public (although the discussion archives are open to committers after being invited), the reason for this is no-one can be frank & honest without hurting people's feelings. --- >From the excellent F/OSS guidebook: http://producingoss.com/en/consensus-democracy.html#electorate "The voting system itself should be used to choose new committers, both full and partial. But here is one of the rare instances where secrecy is appropriate. You can't have votes about potential committers posted to a public mailing list, because the candidate's feelings (and reputation) could be hurt. Instead, the usual way is that an existing committer posts to a private mailing list consisting only of the other committers, proposing that someone be granted commit access. The other committers speak their minds freely, knowing the discussion is private. Often there will be no disagreement, and therefore no vote necessary. After waiting a few days to make sure every committer has had a chance to respond, the proposer mails the candidate and offers him commit access. If there is disagreement, discussion ensues as for any other question, possibly resulting in a vote. For this process to be open and frank, the mere fact that the discussion is taking place at all should be secret . If the person under consideration knew it was going on, and then were never offered commit access, he could conclude that he had lost the vote, and would likely feel hurt. Of course, if someone explicitly asks for commit access, then there is no choice but to consider the proposal and explicitly accept or reject him. If the latter, then it should be done as politely as possible, with a clear explanation: "We liked your patches, but haven't seen enough of them yet," or "We appreciate all your patches, but they required considerable adjustments before they could be applied, so we don't feel comfortable giving you commit access yet. We hope that this will change over time, though." Remember, what you're saying could come as a blow, depending on the person's level of confidence. Try to see it from their point of view as you write the mail." --- I personally suggest reading that whole chapter (#4) for reasons why a lot of projects have a committers mailing list (and yes it is a standard practice.) Adam > -Original Message- > From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev- > boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall > Sent: Monday, 19 October 2009 9:33 PM > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core" > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Frisby, Adam > wrote: > > Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are fairly > low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' or 'meta' > matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. > > > > It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more > than 5 committers for the committers to have a mailing list for these > purposes, since realtime chats aren't practical across timezones. > > > > Adam > > > > I am not sure I'd agree just how standard a process it is. > > The one's I've been involved with or otherwise have some detailed > knowledge of, have never had them; including such big names as GNOME, > Fedora, and Linux. For example the GNOME foundation list is not only > world-readable, but anyone can join: > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list . Actual > foundation members are voted by the community at large. > > Basically the way they are able to operate is, they don't distribute > commit access according to monolithic vote of knighted members; they > have a system of maintainership, and each maintainer gives access > rights to his module/repo as she sees fit, in a web of trust. > > One of the complaints one sometimes hears is how monolithic the > project is (even if the code-base is modular). Maybe the move to git, > and the maturation of the code allows more distribution and > specialization of responsibility? > > My concerns with core mailing list are: > > 1. It's "secret", ie. not world readable. I can understand limiting > membership to voting partners to avoid bikeshedding, but I can't > understand secrecy of any kind in an open source project. > > 2. Decisions made there (aside from commit rights) affect other > people, and they not only have no voice to represent themselves, they > don't even get to know what is being said about them. That doesn't > seem fair somehow. > > The knowledge that someone can read what you write makes you think > harder about what you say. Maybe a private list
Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Frisby, Adam wrote: > I disagree. > > * Commit Rights - those discussions cannot occur in public (although the > discussion archives are open to committers after being invited), the reason > for this is no-one can be frank & honest without hurting people's feelings. Firstly, I did waive discussion for commit access. I also waive money and legal matters. Secondly, I disagree with the logic of the link, as it's premised entirely on being honest might hurt someone's feelings. Honesty is not a function of secrecy. And the case of "there was a long drawn out discussion about me in which I was not able to represent my myself" causing hurt feelings is not considered. Thirdly, I don't think snowcrash thing is about giving him commit access. I don't think things are as neatly compartmentalized as is told (though I could be wrong, it's hard to guess from a secret mailing list). Fourthly, the email is not just about one mailing list, it's about the entire concept of a monolithic core in open source, especially given we're on a DVCS like git. If core is not interested in examining itself as it grows, then so be it. Lastly, my intention is to be productive. If you don't find the discussion productive, feel free to ignore me. And if we're on the subject of community books, I prefer http://www.artofcommunityonline.org/ Cheers, > --- > From the excellent F/OSS guidebook: > http://producingoss.com/en/consensus-democracy.html#electorate > "The voting system itself should be used to choose new committers, both full > and partial. But here is one of the rare instances where secrecy is > appropriate. You can't have votes about potential committers posted to a > public mailing list, because the candidate's feelings (and reputation) could > be hurt. Instead, the usual way is that an existing committer posts to a > private mailing list consisting only of the other committers, proposing that > someone be granted commit access. The other committers speak their minds > freely, knowing the discussion is private. Often there will be no > disagreement, and therefore no vote necessary. After waiting a few days to > make sure every committer has had a chance to respond, the proposer mails the > candidate and offers him commit access. If there is disagreement, discussion > ensues as for any other question, possibly resulting in a vote. For this > process to be open and frank, the mere fact that the discussion is taking > place at all should be secret > . If the person under consideration knew it was going on, and then were > never offered commit access, he could conclude that he had lost the vote, and > would likely feel hurt. Of course, if someone explicitly asks for commit > access, then there is no choice but to consider the proposal and explicitly > accept or reject him. If the latter, then it should be done as politely as > possible, with a clear explanation: "We liked your patches, but haven't seen > enough of them yet," or "We appreciate all your patches, but they required > considerable adjustments before they could be applied, so we don't feel > comfortable giving you commit access yet. We hope that this will change over > time, though." Remember, what you're saying could come as a blow, depending > on the person's level of confidence. Try to see it from their point of view > as you write the mail." > --- > > I personally suggest reading that whole chapter (#4) for reasons why a lot of > projects have a committers mailing list (and yes it is a standard practice.) > > Adam > >> -Original Message- >> From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev- >> boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Ryan McDougall >> Sent: Monday, 19 October 2009 9:33 PM >> To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de >> Subject: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core" >> >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 2:49 AM, Frisby, Adam >> wrote: >> > Ter pretty much summed it up - both it and the irc channel are fairly >> low-volume, and the 'topic' is restricted to only 'personal' or 'meta' >> matters; such as discussion of approval of commit rights. >> > >> > It's pretty standard practice across open source projects with more >> than 5 committers for the committers to have a mailing list for these >> purposes, since realtime chats aren't practical across timezones. >> > >> > Adam >> > >> >> I am not sure I'd agree just how standard a process it is. >> >> The one's I've been involved with or otherwise have some detailed >> knowledge of, have never had them; including such big names as GNOME, >> Fedora, and Linux. For example the GNOME foundation list is not only >> world-readable, but anyone can join: >> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list . Actual >> foundation members are voted by the community at large. >> >> Basically the way they are able to operate is, they don't distribute >> commit access according to monolithic vote of knighted members; they >> have a system of maintai
Re: [Opensim-dev] The notion of "core"
Frisby, Adam wrote: > I disagree. > > * Commit Rights - those discussions cannot occur in public (although the > discussion archives are open to committers after being invited), the reason > for this is no-one can be frank & honest without hurting people's feelings. > > --- > From the excellent F/OSS guidebook: > http://producingoss.com/en/consensus-democracy.html#electorate > "The voting system itself should be used to choose new committers, both full > and partial. But here is one of the rare instances where secrecy is ... I think the quote is a bit out of context, the book was released in 2005 when most people were using centralized version control systems CVCS like subversion. I can understand making a big deal about commit access (or rights if you want to put it that way) when you are working with a CVCS because it is pretty constraining to work it, but aren't you moving/have moved to a DVCS[1] (i.e. git) where having commit access to the central repository is something more akin to being the release manager. Edward 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_revision_control ___ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
