Hi, On 2006-02-04, at 22:42 , Daniel Carrera wrote:
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:A related problem is that the policy at OOo, including Marketing, appears to be to allow only a very few people to have commit access through CVS.Requiring IZ and CVS is a *huge* barrier.Yes. OOo is trying to be a Cathedral and that just doesn't work well in the open source world. Open source is a Bazaar. Examples come to mind easily:
I disagree: MP is not a cathedral.
* When people asked the MP lead why she fired a MarCon the issue was sent to the CC.
Ian and Adam asked Laurent for the CC to intervene. The CC did not ask to see this and sent the issue back to the MP.
* When the MP prepares a slogan, it requires approval by the CC.
Bernhard asked the CC to approve it. The CC did not require it. John had also raised a similar issue at Koper and the CC did not express much enthusiasm to intervene, nor did John.
In fact, the CC dislikes intervening in a project's affairs. I brought the issue of the DLS to the CC because it involved money and a decision had to be made soon.
* Only about 3 people can edit the front page.
Which front page? The OOo homepage? We limit access to it for obvious reasons, but it doesn't have to do with maliciousness. It has more to do with producing errors. Oh, and the number of persons who can edit it is far more than three. By unspoken agreement, I am the primary maintainer of it but that's mainly because we want to limit confusion and thus errors, not because there is a rule or anything like that.
* As Jean just said, only a very few people can modify the MP site.
Have people asked or volunteered?
This is a Cathedral.
No, it is not. You wish to represent it as such, just as you also wish to represent it as arbitrary. In both cases you are wrong. Worse, you are poisoning the atmosphere.
Frankly, I am quite tired of your endless complaining. From my perspective you complain and whine simply because you sometimes do not get your way.
Even in a closed source project I'd consider this unnecessarily Cathedral-like. For example, in a closed source project I'd expect the marketing department to be able to design a slogan without contacting the CEO. And I'd expect the manager of the marketing dept to be able to respond to an inquiry as to why she fired an employee.
The CC returned the issue to MP leads to manage. The idea was that there would be discussion on this list of the issue. So far the leads have not done so, but I would imagine when Jacqueline returns from New Zealand, she and John will in fact discuss it. For what it is worth, the letter that she sent Ryan has been made public and accounted for her reasons.
[snip]
Results: (1) continuing long delays to make the simplest changes, often resulting in the changes being made too late for the events they related to and (2) completely alienating a previously willing and enthusiastic volunteer.I have seen quite a few willing and enthusiastic volunteers depart the project. Some were very skilled and eager to do a project but they just got tired of micromanagement and not seeing their efforts bear fruit.
Really? Do you have evidence of this? Actually, I know of people who have left because of you, Daniel, and I do have evidence. Your tantrums--which, fortunately, you do not visit on us any longer-- alienated many; your tone, and general hostility to people who might dare to disagree with you have sent more than a few fleeing. Most of the people here are volunteers. They do not want to be in a community or on a list where there are constant fights, constant battles and some fear. It has taken some effort by more than a few of us to limit the damage you have caused. And I am fully aware of the damage to the community I am doing by responding to your baseless attacks on this and other projects.
If you do not like the OpenOffice.org project Daniel, why do you stay here? Why tire us all with your dislikes? We do not enjoy it. Perhaps only you do. You have your new project, the Fellowship: attend to that.
It's stupid to have to file an issue to correct a few typos or add a bit of time-critical information, which could be done in less time that it takes to file the issue; and when those people who do have commit privileges are ill or too busy to make the changes, the changes simply don't get made.I think that a better strategy would be to let people do work fairly early on. Certainly if they seem willing. And if anyone abuses of the priviledge then take it away. In my experience, malicious contributors are extremely rare. And you don't need to lock down the site to keep it sane. People don't just go around making changes without thought. In fact, in my experience, people are very hesitant to change anything, and you actually have to encourage them and try to convince them that editing the wiki is ok.At the OpenDocument Fellowship, about 100 people have edit access to the front page. And we seem to manage just fine.
Well, good for you. Perhaps one day you will be as popular as OOo. In the meanwhile: do not bother us with more of your baseless attacks.
Louis
Cheers,
Daniel.
--
/\/`) http://oooauthors.org
/\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org
/\/_/
\/_/ I am not over-weight, I am under-tall.
/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
