On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Wim Feijen <w...@go2people.nl> wrote:
> Hi Simon, Luke and Aymeric, > > Simon, first of all, thanks for your feedback. > > Core developers, I think Simons comment is a thing we should take > seriously. A ticket was closed and people didn't understand the process and > re-opened it. I believe we could have explained more clearly: > 1. our decision > 2. the workaround > 3. how exactly the mailing list works. > > Instead this ticket ended up into an argument about re-opening this > ticket, where people apparently weren't familiar with the process and did > not know the proper steps to raise this to the e-mailing list which was of > course the best step to get this ticket any further. > Looking for a positive outcome here -- my question to the community, and especially those that feel that we've been unresponsive here: how do we improve the situation? In this case, the requested course of action was very clear, and was communicated clearly on three occasions. We also have a contributions document that clearly documents our development process. The reason we have this document is because we don't have the spare resources to reproduce the same discussion every time the same problem arises. We get a dozen tickets a day; and a good proportion of those end up being closed. So - as clear as we think we've made the process, clearly "the message" didn't get through here. How do we fix this? Keep in mind when you're making suggestions, we have a certain number of constraints. We're all volunteers, so we don't have the power to compel anyone to do anything. We dot have the resources to micromanage every decision, so we need to have processes that are essentially self-managing. And keep in mind that one of the outcomes of every discussion about adding a new feature is "no" - just because someone *really* wants something, and *really* thinks it's a good idea, that doesn't mean we have to agree. For me, the best way to proceed seems to raise this ticket to the mailing > list and I will do so in a separate thread. > > Core devs, Aymeric, Luke, know that I have high esteem for the django > community and especially for you. I thank you for your time and dedication > to Django, your responsiveness and willingness to help newcomers and > discuss even trivial details, which I truely admire; and the friendly > atmosphere and openess and willingness to take seriously almost every > remark a know-nothing like me can make, which I value highly. > > Simon, the "jacob" you are speaking about is Jacob Kaplan-Moss, one of the > founders of django and since then our benevolent dictator, who has spent so > much time on django and made this community as it is. In this case, maybe > he could have spent a bit longer on his answer; but maybe he was triaging a > hundred tickets and therefor a bit in a rush. > > Best regards, > > Wim > > > > On Saturday, 11 May 2013 00:41:12 UTC+2, Luke Plant wrote: >> >> Hi Simon, >> >> > I feel that the general attitude expressed in some of the tickets is >> > poor. The one which prompted this post >> > is >> > https://code.djangoproject.**com/ticket/901<https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/901>. >> I think comment 20 >> > <https://code.djangoproject.**com/ticket/901#comment:20<https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/901#comment:20>> >> is a good >> > demonstration of my point. A couple of users were getting frustrated at >> > the lack of discussion/progress which resulted in a fairly >> sanctimonious >> > rant. >> >> I'm afraid I really couldn't disagree more with your characterisation of >> this situation. >> >> If you just read the ticket, you'll find that different core developers >> asked people to move discussion to the mailing list *3 times*, and quite >> politely. >> >> Everyone who comments after that point either hasn't read or has decided >> to ignore *3 requests* about how to get the ticket to progress. And to >> add insult to the injury of having wasted people's time already, some >> start adding comments about how feature requests for Django are a waste >> of time. >> >> This is the height of rudeness, and if all they got was a sanctimonious >> reply, they got better than they deserved. >> >> I'm not claiming that we couldn't do better in terms of our clarifying >> our processes and so on, but I think you picked an example that >> demonstrates exactly the opposite of what you claimed. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Luke >> >> -- >> "God demonstrates his love towards us in this, that while we were >> still sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8) >> >> Luke Plant || http://lukeplant.me.uk/ >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
