On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:26:19 +0300, anatoly techtonik <techto...@gmail.com> wrote: > You're wrong. I did't even have a slight though about making Python take > over another established product. I am speaking about the culture of eating > your own dogfood and collaborating with upstream. Don't you think that > changes that are made to b.p.o like one click OpenID/OAuth support and > revisions linking in text messages are useful to all users of Roundup? Do > you want Roundup to monitor b.p.o and all other projects to merge useful > changes back? I know the person who took the problem of merging patches > from b.p.o to Roundup seriously, and looking at his logs, I must say that > he spent a lot of time - maybe even weeks trying to cut the changes from > the b.p.o version and split it to be a manageable Roundup fork. And FWIW, I > already have commit access for Roundup.
Some context for you. For a good portion of the time that b.p.o was diverging from base roundup, there were no active roundup developers. This happens sometimes in open source projects. But more than that, for quite a while Martin was the only one doing any maintenance on our roundup. He is a very busy man, and we are all thankful for his contributions. I personally am very glad he took the time to write the openid support, given that when he did there were no good generally available packages to do that in Python (are there any now?). The fact that he didn't also choose to take the non-trivial amount of time needed to also contribute it upstream doesn't bother me; his priority was our tracker. If someone else wants to exact it and contribute it upstream I'm pretty sure he'll be happy about that. The point is that he chose to volunteer his time in that way, and our role is simply to thank him for that work...and then decide what volunteer work we wish to do, possibly building upon Martin's work. So, getting the changes that have been made to roundup in b.p.o upstream (when appropriate!) is a laudable goal, and your contributions to that goal are welcome. However, what we perceive as your attitude is, as usual, not helpful. You appear to us to approach us confrontationally, whether that is the intent behind your words or not. Please assume that we also want to make the world a better place, and ask (or suggest) how you can best help to do that. Good things are more likely to happen that way. If we think that you are accusing us of neglecting our duties, you won't get much traction toward your goals. We are all doing what we do voluntarily, because we want to do it. Treat us as valuable, treat us with respect, and you will get much better results (and you will get respect in return). Let me make this very concrete. You said: > The major goal is to lower the barrier to let people start hacking at > Roundup. The secondary goal it to I am not sure about the Python 3 > porting, but currently b.p.o uses a patched version of Roundup, which is > no good. If something is useful for b.p.o - it should be shared with > Roundup community too. The trigger words in that paragraph were "which is no good" and "it should be shared". Those phrases in this context in English convey the attitude "you guys are doing it wrong" and "you don't want to share". Neither of those implications is true. We are doing what works for the Python project, and Ezio has even made time to contribute patches upstream. And we are happy to share, it's just that someone will need to do the work to make that happen. If you are volunteering, that's great. If you can recruit other people to help, that's even better. Here is an example of what you *could* have written: The major goal is to lower the barrier to let people start hacking at Roundup. The secondary goal is to promote all of the local modifications to roundup upstream, so that we can get to a place where b.p.o is no longer running a patched version of Roundup. That way the whole Roundup community can take advantage of the fixes that have been made to b.p.o., and our maintenance burden will be reduced. Can you see the difference in apparent attitude in my rewrite of your words? Same goal, but *cooperative* rather than *confrontational*. --David _______________________________________________ Tracker-discuss mailing list Tracker-discuss@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tracker-discuss
