On Oct 20, 5:26 pm, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org> wrote: > I don't have time to teach you how to communicate professionally.
I don't presume to speak for Yuri (or anyone else) but I think it's not unreasonable that some allowance be given in situations where miscommunication of tone can happen because of cultural differences or differing levels of facility with language, or sheer lack of time used in crafting a communication. It's very understandable if you and Russ want to turn your backs because of a communication which appears abrasive - we're all human, after all - but might that not be throwing the baby out with the bath water? Unless someone is obviously trolling, and if it appears that they want to improve Django in some way (even if their way seems weird or doesn't align with what the core devs want) then it's perhaps worth giving the benefit of the doubt, and important not to discount a message just because of the tone in which it's conveyed. > Reading your message first makes me feel angry, then dismayed. It > makes me feel as if all the hard work I've put into Django doesn't > matter. It makes me think there's really no point in doing any further > work, because someone will just come along and crap all over it again. Please don't feel like that - it's very clear that lots of people value Django enormously, which means they value the hard work everyone has put in to get it to where it is. And I'm not sure if you're talking about any other post than Yuri's in this thread, but that appeared to me to arise from frustrations with the process rather than attributing any particular criticism of the software. > You need to empathize with how someone's going to feel reading your > message. Until you do, people are going to ignore you at best, and get > into a flame war at worst. This is your problem, not mine. Well, if a good idea gets ignored by the committers because it was suggested in a snotty way, perhaps that's not *just* a problem for the suggester. > But since good communication is a two-way street, I'll give you a > hand. Why don't you try making some concrete, actionable suggestions > about how you'd like to volunteer to improve things? If you see > something broken, how about starting by offering to fix it? Perhaps I've misunderstood, but "offering to fix it" for a non- committer means "making a suggestion about how to fix it". Sometimes that involves submitting a patch, and other times (because the problem may be clear but the solution isn't) it means trying to engage in a discussion about "how to fix it". A discussion isn't a monologue, is it? And I know that Django committers are all volunteers, but aren't many of the non-committers who make suggestions volunteers too? You mentioned empathizing, so put yourself for a minute in the position of non-committers who want to suggest how to improve something. If their suggestions seem to disappear into the ether, and are *apparently* ignored by the core devs, then what would constitute reactions from the suggester which are "not unreasonable"? I've got some quotes from Yuri's post, with my comments and questions: "... who will respond on what kind of messages, what part of Django contributions is under their maintenance." I have to admit, I don't know the answer to this. Is it documented somewhere? Does it matter, in your view? "Moreover, new contributors are considered the least important creatures in the world!!!" Do you disagree with this? Obviously newcomers will need to earn the trust of the community and the committers. But perhaps a way needs to be found of avoiding what mrts characterises as "there are many who have at times felt frustrated how contributions or suggestions are managed in Django. Some of them seem to have walked away or just don't participate in discussions any longer". Or this this just a figment of mrts' imagination? "The more you do, the more attention your suggestions receive. But for your first enhancement to be approved, you'll have to wait a year!" It would seem that what the suggestion is should merit the level of attention rather than who the suggester is, modulo the notion that obviously old hands have greater credibility than new kids on the block. "Half of feature expressed in list is never replied by core developers with their opinion or explanations. Half of feature requests in Trac got misunderstood or not replied or reviewed within 1 year." "Imagine your recipients email boxes silently drops 50% of your traffic, and recipients don't response on 50% of last 50% within first year of waiting" Leaving aside the exact time frames and percentages which may well be exaggerated, do you feel that the process is working so well that no one is justified in feeling the frustration that's obviously being expressed? Overall ISTM that people are expressing frustration at "being hard done by" rather than just being ungrateful whiners. Or am I coming across as an ungrateful whiner myself? ;-) Regards, Vinay Sajip --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
