Discussion about my work should probably be separated from discussion about the project guidelines. Here are my responses to the posts relevant to my work.
=== On 5/30/06, Antonio Gallardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: > I only mentioned my fork to support my ideas about improving trunk. I > only started the fork because I was in a high-speed car accident, my > brain was damaged, and I needed a project to prove my technical skills > were fine. I didn't know that and I hope every thing is ok.
My abilities seem fine, but headaches create delays. All the work of the last 3 months should have taken me less than 2 weeks.
> But none of my ideas are "good". I am not part of the development > effort because my ideas have been completely spurned. Every > suggestion I have made about Lenya has been discarded by the other > Committers. Most of the issues discussed on the dev list were fixed > or avoided in my fork because I fixed the architecture. Attempting to > pass that knowledge back to the 1.4 developers generated this > complaint. I've been in different Open Source communities since 1999. In this few years, I learned the real power of an open source community is in his diversity. The capacity to see the same problem from different points of views. The ability to find different solutions, different improvements. This is what make us strong. At the same time, I learned often people needs time to digest new ideas. I can say, it's natural, because our human nature is usually against changes. When an idea is not welcomed at the first introduction, we should prefer to give people some time to think about the issue and return to it later, perhaps in a couple of weeks the community can provide a better input or welcome the idea.
That's what this thread is about. If enough devs are willing to rationally consider a radical change, then my work becomes a major contribution. If they do not like it, then it was just an aberration.
> I did not start the fork because my suggestions are disdained. I did > not do it to hurt the project in any way. I needed to write code, and > could use a better version of Lenya. I'm scratching my own itch for a > few hours each week. My code and ideas are unwanted in trunk, so how > does my private work hurt the project? I just can say: Wow! I wondered where you had been. Reading this mail is sad to me. Not because of you, solprovider, I cannot express how much I appreciate your openess. It's sad because seems the whole community situation is already worse than we expected. The ASF is mostly about communities, the code is not the most important. At the same time, I will like to point you to Rules for Revolutionaries [1]. Please take 5 minutes and read it.
Good link. The question is whether the Lenya project is willing to have a revolution.
> I would enjoy adding a branch at ASF, but why do it? It would risk > splitting the effort between the current 1.4 and a simpler, easier, > more flexible version. I will like to see your version. Is there a demo? > The programmers enjoy working on the complex > version. The users who would benefit from the easier version could > not add value to it. Sometimes it's not the case. ;-) > The fork is probably better as my private project. Please reconsider this.
I do not want to keep the code private. It just did not seem likely there was any place for it in the Lenya project. === On 5/30/06, Andreas Hartmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I hope you don't feel offended by Thorsten mentioning your fork. I don't think it was meant as an accusation, but he rather wanted to substantiate the statement that the community needs a stronger sense of collaboration and joined efforts. Sorry, of course Thorsten can speak for himself :)
Do not worry about offending me. Having my ideas ignored made me sad that the project would lose them. It was not personal. Either the ideas were too advanced for the other devs, or the other devs were too focused on their current work to consider alternatives. I am still here, right?
> But none of my ideas are "good". I am not part of the development > effort because my ideas have been completely spurned. Every > suggestion I have made about Lenya has been discarded by the other > Committers. From my point of view, that's not generally because we dislike the ideas, but because they are too far away from the current state of Lenya. I find many of your proposals regarding the repository API (e.g., the naming of classes etc.) very interesting and useful.
See Antonio's link about evolution vs. revolution. When I first proposed those ideas, Lenya 1.4 was just started. That was the proper time to implement the revolution. I was not a Committer yet, and did not have the influence to force such a drastic change.
And AFAIK your improvements of the search engine are appreciated and used by the community.
OT: Has someone committed the latest changes to search from my website for 1.2.5? There have been several small but critical bug fixes. === On 5/30/06, Michael Wechner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The programmers enjoy working on the complex > version. The users who would benefit from the easier version could > not add value to it. The fork is probably better as my private > project. I am not sure if I understand you on this. Can you explain a bit. For instance I do a lot of things within svn.wyona.org/repos/public and I think it would be bad if I would upload everything into the Lenya SVN just because I am a committer and have the possibility to do so. And I think every committer should behave like this so it seems to me that you are doing the right way.
Most of the reason to keep it private is because it is not fully usable yet. I am not shy about releasing code on my website. Much effort has gone into 1.4, and much of it would be discarded for the simpler version. My version is based on Lenya 1.2.2, and much of the code in that version could be discarded if I was not concerned with backwards-compatibility. While there are not many LOC, my code is not a patch; it is a major refactoring. Not because I rewrote the code, but because there are new protocols that bypass most of the current code. How will the other devs feel about using something that obsoletes most of their work for the last year? === On 5/31/06, Thorsten Scherler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
El mar, 30-05-2006 a las 02:13 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: > I only mentioned my fork to support my ideas about improving trunk. I > only started the fork because I was in a high-speed car accident, my > brain was damaged, and I needed a project to prove my technical skills > were fine. That is perfectly alright, but having this work in the ASF rep would help to review your ideas and we benefit on a project base.
Are you certain?
> You are aware of the fork because I mentioned it in the thread about > handling extensions. Well, you mentioned it a couple of times in different threads, sometimes you refer to this work as lenya-1.3.
What do you call a major revision based on 1.2 with most of the functionality of 1.4, but simplified? I do not like "lenya-solprovider". "lenya-1.3" makes it very clear it is backwards-compatible with 1.2 but not 1.4.
> But none of my ideas are "good". We cannot really evaluate them.
Every idea was discussed on the MLs. They are documented on my website under "Suggestions". There were some changes during implementation. (The SitetreeGenerator does not sort as I originally suggested. It is too easy to sort the results later with XSL.)
> I am not part of the development > effort because my ideas have been completely spurned. Every > suggestion I have made about Lenya has been discarded by the other > Committers. Most of the issues discussed on the dev list were fixed > or avoided in my fork because I fixed the architecture. Attempting to > pass that knowledge back to the 1.4 developers generated this > complaint. This is a phenomenon that we need to resolve as community that's why I started this thread. It seems to me that one solution is to create a branch and check in your code. This way we have a pool of ideas and architecture enhancement that we can use. Regarding the complains of others, we need to find a more productive way to discuss this points in this community. Having code examples is helping me personally a lot more then dry discussions.
The project can have the code. The issue is the code is not usable. It needs the ability to edit documents, the admin screens need to be changed, and search needs to be reconfigured. The rest of my ToDo list is enhancements. Would the code be disdained because it is not fully functional yet? Would it be better to wait until I complete the basic functionality?
> I did not start the fork because my suggestions are disdained. I did > not do it to hurt the project in any way. I needed to write code, and > could use a better version of Lenya. I'm scratching my own itch for a > few hours each week. My code and ideas are unwanted in trunk, so how > does my private work hurt the project? Yes and no. IMO it hurts the project not having your code. We are losing valuable ideas. Let me state crystal clear (in the name of the Lenya PMC) that your code is wanted. Let us create a branch and see how we can reuse your work in the trunk.
OK. Now? Or when it is usable?
> I would enjoy adding a branch at ASF, but why do it? It would risk > splitting the effort between the current 1.4 and a simpler, easier, > more flexible version. Actually I do not see this risk. Since now you are the only one working on the version but maybe people will join you and we can enhance the trunk as well.
As I wrote above, this is a major refactoring. As a project, we do not have the resources to maintain two trunks. While my version is a much better upgrade path for anybody using 1.2, what happens to users of 1.4? Would someone write a migration function for them? The code does not have JCR support yet. Adding it will be easier than the first attempt, but it is still more work.
> The programmers enjoy working on the complex > version. I consider myself as programmer and believe me I do *not* enjoy working on complex things and I would love to see a simpler version.
What if you have spent months developing the complex version? Are you willing to discard your work? Are you willing to offend everybody else that contributed? If we do not use my code, I will not be offended. If we do use it, we could offend everybody that contributed. We also delay the next release again as everybody learns the new architecture. It should take less than a day to learn; I am not joking about how this version is much simpler. I would publish documentation to make it even easier. Then we need to integrate an editor and fix the admin screens. That will take another month at my current rate of progress. It might be done in a week if all the devs committed to it. The odds of that happening seem rather low. Tell me how you want to handle this. Submit now, or wait until it is usable? solprovider --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
