On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 12:41 PM Peter Uhnak <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Stef,
>
> I understand that everyone is short on time, but I consider not preserving
> the history problematic for two reasons
>
> * it is appropriating someone else's work as one's own -- this seems
> borderline illegal, or at the very least in violation of MIT license
>

Not really. If the contributors are specified in the copyright, is it
stealing?

Now, my point is manners. I got in 4/5 emails:
 - you're stupid because you did not use Peter's tool
 - you're inefficient because you took one hour to do it
 - you're stealing

The first two points show first one big problem that I've seem many times
with people and software: missing context.
People think most of the time that "I would have done it better". But
usually they don't take into account
 - the time constraints (I had one hour, and one hour I had)
 - the knowledge (where is the Artefact Repo?, why is it failing for
Milton?, Do I know enough about metacello/streams/artefact to do it well?)
 - the working environment (does the person that did it have all the tools
to work properly? does he have a healthy working environment? For example,
I've worked on several big companies where you can find really bad
environments...)
 - technical and not technical problems that are sometimes independent of
the problem itself (take into account that for example, fighting against a
metacello baseline is completely orthogonal to your tool or even iceberg,
good internet connection)

All these details are important also at the end, and they should be put
into the balance too when we make a judgement.


> * it is sending bad signals to potential contributors that we can scrub
> them anytime we want
>
> as you yourself have said:
> > @People try to avoid to piss on good will of others.
> Yet this is what it feels like to some when traces of their contributions
> are voided.
>

And this is my third point. This "stealing" idea is mainly a matter of
manners.
I really hope nobody here really thinks I wanted to take credit for
Olivier, Guillaume or any of the other contributors.
Still I preserved pointers to the original authors and their original
website in google sites.

But in the case somebody did think that, I removed the repository to remove
any doubt.
So again, I apologize if somebody felt offended, but I also prefer to not
be called a thief.

Now, when I do stuff I'm not thinking about "oh yes, I'm getting famous",
that would be pretty sad for me :/.
I do stuff because I just think it's useful.
I DON'T CARE personally about artefact, and I don't want to take credit for
it.
I don't even care about the fu***ng 2 commits I did to port it to Pharo 7,
I can tell anybody what I did so she/he can re-doit.
Because I don't use Artefact. Now, Somebody wants the "credit"? I could
have even amended a commit and put anybody else as author.

My problem here is people assuming stealing by default, instead of
assuming, for example, mistake.
Imagine an alternative scenario:
 - X: "Hey Guille, could you add in the copyright X, and Y and Z? They also
contributed to the project, you should take them into account..."
 - Guille: "Ah sure, sorry, this was not my intention, I'm so stupid, I
forgot about Z. Commit push, done".

If instead of bashing on people, we wanted to discuss on how to actually
FIX the thing, here are my 2 cents:
 - From a copyright perspective it should have been enough to check the
licence file and name the contributors there
 - The history could have been retrieved in a separate branch and then
merged (and look, we had the best of the two worlds!)
 - both of the things could have been then integrated through a pull
request (luckily in less than one hour :))

And at the end, with the apport of everybody we could have got a repository
with history, baseline and working on pharo 7.

Now, from a human perspective, please let's try everybody to assume the
best of the other by default.
That will just make all interactions much more healthy.

And please, this is not particularly directed to anybody, I've seen such
remarks many times. Let's just think positive.
Problems can be fixed if we talk about them, but more specifically if we
are looking for solutions.

Reply via email to