On Monday, 29 September 2025 at 23:17:06 UTC-7 [email protected] wrote:

Well, yes, you can complain that it's volunteers' dictatorships - but 
instead you can tell yourself that it's great that you didn't have to spend 
you precious time
on that plumbing assignment. An unpaid volunteer's labour of this sort is 
donation to the project (obviously there is no direct benefit to the 
volunteer here, as
it's not something interesting from scientific or engineering point of you)


I don't dispute that the sagemath build process needed 
maintenance/modernisation work because bitrot is a real thing -- and as 
Orlitzky points out, it happens by itself. I'm not doubting that your 
intent is to make sage really better.

I think the plumbing analogy can do a little more work here: it may very 
well be that the sewage main in your street needs replacement. That's 
maintenance that needs to happen every few decades. But if the trucks show 
up one morning unannounced and break open the street and block the 
driveway, most people will be annoyed at least. Quite a few would be livid. 
And that's not how that kind of work generally happens. Instead, people 
receive information about what is going to happen, why it is going to 
happen, and what they can do to mitigate the impact.

The exact actions would be different here, but the same principles apply: 
if people are informed beforehand about the work, its necessity and the 
benefits, it is much easier for them to accept and plan around the 
inconveniences of construction.
 

The only real way to get any classical  governance is to get some funding, 
then one can organise around the grant, like it happened in  OpenDreamKit 
times.
(then at least some volunteers can get paid and thus be more thorough in 
their work).
Otherwise it's, as I explained above, a volunteers' dictatorship. Donate 
your labour, and rule with thus earned social capital.


Time spent on improving sage can definitely earn "social" capital. It does 
require that many in the community *perceive* your contributions as 
improving sage, though. So I think it is also in the interest of the 
developer/maintainer who wants to earn social capital in order to be able 
to influence decisions in sage, to try and get buy-in from many community 
members: it will improve trust in their judgement to make changes to sage 
that are beneficial. Trust is an important component of social capital.

 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/f4871539-adb8-48a9-83c9-e737c7a7e477n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to