On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 12:03 PM, lkcl luke <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jeff Kunce <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, lkcl luke <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Jeff Kunce <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Yeah, I'm top posting. The thread is Promoting Pyjamas - and might as > >> > well > >> > just end here. > >> > > >> > There is an open source community - and "community" suggests a group > of > >> > people have set of principles that they agree to work with in common, > at > >> > least for purposes of the community. > >> > > >> > Luke, I admire you for sticking to your principles. But the other > kids > >> > just > >> > aren't going to play with the boy who makes up his own rules and > insists > >> > that they are the only way the game can be played. > >> > > >> > You do amazing work, and I'm thankful for that. I'm just sad that you > >> > hide > >> > this product behind walls of ideological crankiness. > >> > >> it's not as quotes bad quotes as people make out. and i've decided > >> on my principles: i worked hard to come up with them: it would be damn > >> stupid of me to abandon them, wouldn't it? > >> > >> plus, there is another reason that i haven't mentioned explicitly: by > >> saying "no, you can't take the easy way out", once the grumbling's > >> stopped, there's been more activity sorting out the infrastructure - > >> which involves other people actually talking and coordinating and > >> writing python and pyjamas apps than there has been in a long time.. > >> hasn't there? > >> > >> and once it's done, i'm sure that the people who did that will feel > >> proud to have done it, won't they? it's *their* community, not some > >> jack-ass piece of shit that can't be modified. you _did_ see peter's > >> request to enable the feature of allowing him to close bugreports? > >> because it's a proprietary monetarily-zero-cost service on > >> code.google.com that cannot happen, can it? > >> > >> i have good reasons, jeff - they weren't just made up on the spur of > >> the moment "i know i'll decide to make peoples' lives hell". > >> > >> l. > > > > > > I really do understand, Luke. And I mean it when I say I admire you. > > > > However, the thread is "Promoting Pyjamas." The first step in doing that > > would be to join in the standard (if not best) practices of the > community. > > > > When you give a sexy demo at pycon - people want to go to the site and > start > > playing with it, even before your talk is finished. If those first steps > are > > successful, they will join the mailing list to learn more. If they have > > more success, they will contribute. Easy access with familiar tools *is* > > Promoting Pyjamas. Any barriers you put in the way of that process is > *not* > > Promoting Pyjamas. > > > > Truly-free-services, eat-our-own-dogfood-tools, no-www-urls, > > independent-nameservers, append-multiple-lkcl-causes-here ... all good > > things ... but when those things come first, the adoption of Pyjamas > > suffers. > > really - jeff: thank you, but please - stop. i have enough to do, > and this is very distracting: it's not up for discussion: please just > accept it. please realise that any continued discussion just wastes > time and energy - yours and mine. > > i have a limited amount of time - i.e. today - to get the basics of a > wiki written - it's almost done. > > please feel free to promote pyjamas, but let me focus - right now. > > > l. No need for you to spend any time on this, Luke. We are in agreement. My original comment was a suggestion to "end this thread" - because proposals to change anything against your principles will go nowhere. Or, in your words, "it's not up for discussion: please just accept it." Just a statement of reality, not a call for change or discussion.
