-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Several of us have the impression that the mood has become a lot more aggressive and negative. This does not only affect the forums with "non developers" but also the IRC chan. This leads to a reduced motivation and a barrier to implementing required changes. The impression also is that some developers join the discussions without first trying to understand what the topic is and providing productive feedback. One example for this is the git move. We had a long discussion and decided to move to sourceforge. Someone came up with "uhm, we could recontact the github folks" and then suddenly, without further discussion, we switch to github with results like a missing commit email list. This can lead to hurt feelings resulting in people reconsidering if they want to spend their time for the project.
The question here is how we can work together in a more constructive way? We will always come to points where we disagree on a topic and can't find a consensus. It is probably a bad idea to just fork the project and have two games as a result which do extremely similar things. It is especially important that nobody feels threatened with things like "we could remove your commit privileges if you don't give in". As far as we over here are aware we are all peers with no clearly defined "management infrastructure" which will always have the last word. In the past we sometimes asked Dave for help in situations where reaching a consensus was not possible but we should face that he is no longer active in the project. So do we perhaps need to find and define someone as "decision leader" in case we end in a stalemate? This would *only* be valid for case where a stalemate is reached otherwise and the position would not be based on the tasks handled in the project (e.g. releases, administration, coding, artwork, ...). This can only make sense if we discuss things on a technical level wherever possible. Since we are a game it is hard to keep out the social perspective among our users, but we should not base it on the social interactions between developers. In general it might be a good idea to come back to discussing larger changes in the open upfront. Here we need to make sure to keep the discussion open and not directly have everyone else jump in shutting down any attempt based on "we have always done it this way" or "I don't like it because I don't like it because I don't like it ...". -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlLuX84ACgkQfFda9thizwUXZwCfYFw9u/nppWHdItXuWQ+GBOGu yMEAoJtfWqLMuCoUHh8MlGeCCcRZ7BSa =kanF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
