Hi, On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Carl Peterson <carlopeter...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Mike Solomon <m...@mikesolomon.org>wrote: > >> >> The only hassle for me, which I did not run up against when I started >> with the project, is David’s way of communicating. I’m not claiming this >> is all on him, but I’m also pretty sure that I’m not the only one who has >> peaced out because of this. I am looking for ways for this to no longer be >> an issue. I was hoping that branches would go a way towards making this >> happen for myself and hopefully other developers, but it’s clear that this >> is not a good idea. >> >> In my two day jobs, director of the ensemble 101 and developer for the >> Guido project, I work with two (very different) teams of people on projects >> that require creativity, consistency, and tons of communication. Neither >> of them has any of this friction resulting from communication issues, both >> of them enjoy a diversity in major contributions, and both are evolving >> rapidly and stably in several interesting ways at the same time. I truly >> hope that LilyPond can be like that. >> >> > I don't know how you communicate with your other two teams, but the simple > fact is that email is a terrible method of communication, when it comes to > the things that you appear to be seeking. An amused or straightforward > comment can across as harsh or sarcastic when visual and aural cues are > absent (citing the studies that show that 90% of communication is > nonverbal, i.e., not connected to the actual words). Some people's manners > of speech translate into text-only communication better than others', and > some don't translate at all. I had a boss a couple of years back who could > be very friendly and personable face-to-face, but unless she was obvious > happy about something, always came across as stern and upset with the way > things were done. It happens. But you may already be well aware of all this. > I always feel a bit silly writing emoticons and exclamation points, but they are nice to see(!) > It is regrettable that you would let such things interfere with your > contributions to LilyPond. > Exactly. Both you and David are invaluable to this project. I watched the paralysis set in, the deadlock, and wondered a bit about the future of the project. I think there has to be some compromise in this Apollonian/Dionysian test of wills (to throw in a little pretentiousness). > Ultimately, it is about the project, not the people. Perhaps > counter-intuitively, the answer to the problem you perceive is not to > reduce participation, but to increase participation. In my own case, my > interactions with David had the effect of getting me more involved in the > "behind the scenes" workings of the code. Why? So that eventually, David > won't be able to criticize me for not being willing to "get my hands dirty." > Well, I ordinarily have a bit of a thin skin, and I remember reading somewhere on the lists that you have to have some nerve to contribute. My personal response to the possibility of brutally honest criticism--which is a necessary thing if this project isn't going to go to hell--is to make sure I've got everything as polished as I can make it before I make it public. And accepting that I've got a lot to learn, (This is about me, and is in no way directed at you, Mike.) However, when the standstill happens, something has to be done. I'm sorry that I don't have any solution to offer, other than to try to work together for the sake of LilyPond, (Emoticons! Kidding.) --David
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
