On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 02:04, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Dion, > > > > The reason for this challenge is simple: to > > > demonstrate the the antipathy towards other > > > ASF efforts is damaging not only to the ASF, > > > but to Maven itself. > > > 'antipathy' == 'A strong feeling of aversion or repugnance'. > > However you want to label it, Jason's harshly phrased statements yesterday > regarding collaboration with other ASF projects (and people) expressed an > attitude that some people, including myself, obviously didn't view > positively. In fairness, my reaction is influenced as much by my views on > software development as by his words. Nor did I miss his somewhat contrite > reply to Ken Coar. I would hope that his comments are not representative of > Maven. I would prefer to believe that his comments are not even > representative of himself.
I don't see how my comments could not be seen as representative of myself. I make no apology for speaking my mind, being somewhat ruthless and even vicious at times. Most people who meet me find I'm generally amicable. I am not averse to collaboration but like everyone, whether they care to admit it or not, I am selective. An example of this for me outside of software is my participation in activities around my community. I don't have any children of my own but I help take of my neighbour's children, go to parent/teacher meetings and I'm generally interested in the education of children. I like to setup little workshops for kids for building radios or whatever. I was once asked to work with this person who was the embodiment of popular trends in education in the province I live in. In a nutshell the theory is a child's self-esteem is more important critical thinking. That it's ok if Bobby can't spell 'button' as long as he feels good about himself. To me that is utter nonsense. Self esteem emanates from the ability to think critically and deal with the world around you. Creating a artificial bubble around a child serves no useful purpose and you are basically crippling the child for life. That's my personal view and I felt so strongly that this is a digusting notion and will only server to cause widespread irrepairable damage. So I told this person to screw off and that I would have nothing I feel much the same way about creating an artifical bubble of community around projects that have no substance. That quality software comes first and it is not borne out of community. If the software is good, serves a purpose and is useful a community will form. I feel that collaboration with some individuals and groups would only serve to poison worthy efforts. They are my personal feelings and I'm certainly not going to ignore them. I don't have to like everyone, I don't have to respect everyone. I get singled out for a single line of dialog and get labeled as a hostile anti collaborator but I have actually done some good around here and have worked successfully with many individuals to get things done. > You know me well enough to know that I view collaboration as the efficient > reuse of expertise, creativity and resources towards the synergistic > development of the best result. No matter how right I think I am, I could > be wrong about something; no matter how wrong I think someone else is, there > could be the seed of a really good idea there if I am willing to give it > further exploration after shrugging off the first reaction to dismiss it. > Usually there is an amalgam that is better than the original "pure" ideas. I don't just decide arbitrarily not to collaborate. I look at all I can get my hands on and make a decision. And I most certainly agree that all ideas are recombinations of existing ideas with the odd original extension. > A development tool exists for the purpose of servicing other projects. I > viewed Sam's comments as expressing the concern that if personalities were > to get in the way of collaborating to produce something that better serves > other projects, then that would be damaging. With Ant, the ASF set the > standard (for better or worse) for Java build tools. With Maven, that is > extended, enhanced, embedded to handle web-based project management. You > said that there is a great deal of synergy between Ant and Maven. It is > natural to feel that these are related projects, and that collaboration > would not only be beneficial, but highly desired by all parties. The > antagonistic response, with neither provocation nor justification, was > disconcerting to say the least. Would you please give it a rest. The fact of the matter is you barely know me at all and without context they probably did seem out of place. My qualms are with a very select group. Take a look at some of the other things I've done. I don't have a blanket-venom policy for everyone. I can also work productively when there are disagreements. Geir and I have often had it out over bits and pieces in Velocity but we always eventualy align and compromise and Velocity is doing just fine. Geir and I have probably had discussion that are probably 10 times more heated than anything that's gone on here. I am not an entirely unreasonable person I'm just highly opinionated. > It is unsurprising then to have concerns > regarding a productive relationship with an entity exhibiting that attitude. > Your reply that the workload of one PMC having to oversee both projects > being too high to do properly came across as completely differently in > character. > > --- Noel > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
