Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi, cool down, people, if anything gave FOSS a bad reputation, that's well the old pyjamas website (all broken, because wheel must be reinvented here), and most of all the terror management that occurred on its mailing list. Previously I had always considered open-source as a benevolent state of mind, until I got, there, the evidence that it could also be, for some people, an irrational and harmful cult (did you know github were freaking evildoers ?). Blatantly the pyjs ownership change turned out to be an awkward operation (as reactions on that ML show it), but a fork could also have very harmfully split pyjs-interested people, so all in all I don't think there was a perfect solution - dictatorships never fall harmlessly. The egos of some might have been hurt, the legal sense of others might have been questioned, but believe me all this fuss is pitiful compared to the real harm that was done numerous time to willing newcomers, on pyjs' old ML, when they weren't aware about the heavy dogmas lying around. A demo sample (I quote it each time the suvject arises, sorry for duplicates) | Please get this absolutely clear in your head: that | | you do not understand my reasoning is completely and utterly | | irrelevant. i understand *your* reasoning; i'm the one making the | | decisions, that's my role to understand the pros and cons. i make a | | decision: that's the end of it. | | You present reasoning to me: i weight it up, against the other | | reasoning, and i make a decision. you don't have to understand that | | decision, you do not have to like that decision, you do not have to | | accept that decision.| Ling live pyjs, ++ PKL Le 08/05/2012 07:37, alex23 a écrit : On May 8, 1:54 pm, Steven D'Apranosteve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Seriously, this was a remarkably ham-fisted and foolish way to resolve a dispute over the direction of an open source project. That's the sort of thing that gives open source a bad reputation. The arrogance and sense of entitlement was so thick you could choke on it. Here's a sampling from the circle jerk of self-justification that flooded my inbox over the weekend: i did not need to consult Luke, nor would that have be productive No, it's generally _not_ productive to ask someone if you can steal their project from them. i have retired Luke of the management duties, particularly, *above* the source Who is this C Anthony Risinger asshole and in what way did he _hire_ the lead developer? What I have wondered is, what are effects of having the project hostage to the whims of an individuals often illogically radical software libre beliefs which are absolutely not up for discussion at all with anyone. What I'm wondering is: how is the new set up any different? Why were Luke Leighton's philosophies/whims any more right or wrong than those held by the new Gang of Dicks? Further more, the reason I think it's a bad idea to have this drawn out discussion is that pretty much the main reason for this fork is because of Luke leadership and project management decisions and actions. To have discussions of why the fork was done would invariably lead to quite a bit of personal attacks and petty arguments. Apparently it's nicer to steal someone's work than be mean to them. I agree, Lex - this is all about moving on. This is a software project, not a cult of personality. Because recognising the effort of the lead developer is cult-like. My only quibble is with the term fork. A fork is created when you disagree with the technical direction of a project. That's not the issue here. This is a reassignment of the project administration only - a shuffling of responsibility among *current leaders* of the community. There is no divine right of kings here. My quibble is over the term fork too, as this is outright theft. I don't remember the community acknowledging _any other leadership_ over Luke Leighton's. I suspect Luke will be busy with other projects and not do much more for Pyjamas/pyjs, Luke correct me if you see this and I am wrong. How about letting the man make his own fucking decisions? All of you spamming the list with your unsubscribe attempts: Anthony mentioned in a previous email that he's using mailman now Apparently it's the responsibility of the person who was subscribed without their permission to find out the correct mechanism for unsubscribing from that list. apparantly a bunch of people were marked as POSTING in the DB, but not receiving mail (?) Oh I see, the sudden rush of email I received was due to an error in the data they stole... Nobody wins if we spend any amount of time debating the details of this transition, what's done is done. Truly the
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 12:39 +0200, Pascal Chambon wrote: believe me all this fuss is pitiful compared to the real harm that was done numerous time to willing newcomers, on pyjs' old ML, when they weren't aware about the heavy dogmas lying around. A demo sample (I quote it each time the suvject arises, sorry for duplicates) | Please get this absolutely clear in your head: that | | you do not understand my reasoning is completely and utterly | | irrelevant. i understand *your* reasoning; i'm the one making the | | decisions, that's my role to understand the pros and cons. i make a | | decision: that's the end of it. | | You present reasoning to me: i weight it up, against the other | | reasoning, and i make a decision. you don't have to understand that | | decision, you do not have to like that decision, you do not have to | | accept that decision. | The above seems perfectly reasonable to me. You're working with Python anyway - a language organised by a team that gives full control to the BDFL... Imagine instead that you were talking about a bug in a proprietary piece of software (Oracle / Internet Explorer / etc) - do you think they'd let *you* make the decision, or keep the option under discussion until *you* fully understood the reasoning of the company that owned the code? No - they'd listen to your argument, weigh up the two sides, and make a decision on their own. The idea of having two sides able to make their cases and one person rule on them is incredibly common - it's how courts across the world work, and it's how management of any team (software related or not) goes. Tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Blatantly the pyjs ownership change turned out to be an awkward operation (as reactions on that ML show it), but a fork could also have very harmfully split pyjs-interested people, so all in all I don't think there was a perfect solution - dictatorships never fall harmlessly. You say fork could also have very harmfully split, what harms are you referring to? In the open source world there were tons of forks of projects and it proved to be a useful mechanism for resolving serious management issues. On the other hand the kind of hostile takeover that happened with pyjs is virtually unparalleled in the open source world. What made you think such a unique operation will be less harmful than the other which has already been tried many times? | Please get this absolutely clear in your head: that | | you do not understand my reasoning is completely and utterly | | irrelevant. i understand *your* reasoning; i'm the one making the | | decisions, that's my role to understand the pros and cons. i make a | | decision: that's the end of it. | | You present reasoning to me: i weight it up, against the other | | reasoning, and i make a decision. you don't have to understand that | | decision, you do not have to like that decision, you do not have to | | accept that decision.| Again, if you don't like the lead developer just fork the project, come up with a new name, new website and new infrastructure and start building a new community. Why didn't the rebels do that? Cheers, Daniel -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 15/05/2012 17:44, Daniel Fetchinson wrote: Blatantly the pyjs ownership change turned out to be an awkward operation (as reactions on that ML show it), but a fork could also have very harmfully split pyjs-interested people, so all in all I don't think there was a perfect solution - dictatorships never fall harmlessly. You say fork could also have very harmfully split, what harms are you referring to? In the open source world there were tons of forks of projects and it proved to be a useful mechanism for resolving serious management issues. On the other hand the kind of hostile takeover that happened with pyjs is virtually unparalleled in the open source world. What made you think such a unique operation will be less harmful than the other which has already been tried many times? | Please get this absolutely clear in your head: that | | you do not understand my reasoning is completely and utterly | | irrelevant. i understand *your* reasoning; i'm the one making the | | decisions, that's my role to understand the pros and cons. i make a | | decision: that's the end of it. | | You present reasoning to me: i weight it up, against the other | | reasoning, and i make a decision. you don't have to understand that | | decision, you do not have to like that decision, you do not have to | | accept that decision.| Again, if you don't like the lead developer just fork the project, come up with a new name, new website and new infrastructure and start building a new community. Why didn't the rebels do that? Cheers, Daniel Typical shabby Nazi trick. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
i have not banned anything, or even alluded to it, whatsoever. i asked that one specific mail not be commented upon OK, sorry if I misunderstood, but that's still suppression in my book. reading your accounts strewn about is interesting, what exactly are *your* motives? My motives are as I've stated; I'm a commercial user with products in development which use Pyjamas and that I have a long-term stake in. With a bit of thought, anyone should see why I value stability and continued viability. It's a long game but the potential payback to pyjamas could be huge *if* it can keep commercial users on board. This is where the existential threat to pyjamas comes from and why I and many others consider the takeover to be reckless and unjustified. Luke is a talented developer, there is no doubt of this, but he is one of the most socially inept persons i have ever encountered I don't think this is the right place to bash people or even defend them on a personal level. We get it though. You didn't get along with the guy. the idea was to retain Luke I'm sorry but I don't believe this. Luke can speak for himself of course but this is not how you keep people on-board. he decided to play legal threats as the first card He's claimed that you lifted data from his server without permission. I'm not commenting on that, but if it's true then this is a massive roadblock in the viability of the project. I for one don't want to be involved in it. Can you picture the scene where a developer or businessperaon goes into a meeting with very senior, very conservative executives trying to pitch a product, and it turns out there are serious legal concerns surrounding the technology platform? If it isn't true then perhaps you should put people's minds at rest by giving a detailed explanation of the whole mail server situation, including where the data originated, where it is now, how it got there and why the accidental mailing of so many people occurred. indeed, you have witnessed little chatter I'd invite anyone to review the pyjamas list for the last 7 days before they make up their minds. Some of the statements I've seen have been regrettable. by realizing this is not as black-and-white as you's like it to be. I have an ethical objection here, but moreover; it clearly just runs against my interests to support your actions. I'm not sure you considered the commercial users here, and with respect nor do I really get the impression you've understood it, still. By the way; I'm not associated with Luke at all. I've emailed him off-list a few times this week to discuss some angles to do with my work, but that's it. In fact, I support Kees' proposition that Pyjamas should seek sponsorship from the Python/Apache/Free Software Foundation. This would resolve questions of legitimacy and leadership. In my ideal outcome, we could tailor pyjamas more to business use; e.g. tidying up any license issues, offering a commercial support contract (this will help mitigate the damage done to perceptions of credibility), publishing a commercial use policy (one of the foundations could offer support with this I hope). James -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:06:47 AM UTC-5, james hedley wrote:
i have not banned anything, or even alluded to it, whatsoever. i asked that
one specific mail not be commented upon
OK, sorry if I misunderstood, but that's still suppression in my book.
James, how can you realistically condemn a simple request with such colorful
words, now and in previous messages, yet simultaneously claim to support Luke's
many impositions ...
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pyjamas-dev/wK8f2XJQvlY/ZTK-9bZ5TisJ
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pyjamas-dev/wK8f2XJQvlY/xp63LbOYO6oJ
... i could easily drum up a hundred more, if i were both inclined and
extremely bored. i have been in contact by other users who claim a similar
state as yourself, and frankly, everyone save yourself expresses a far more
genuine interest ... your comments are riddled with dissonance ...
reading your accounts strewn about is interesting, what exactly are *your*
motives?
My motives are as I've stated; I'm a commercial user with products in
development
which use Pyjamas and that I have a long-term stake in. With a bit of
thought, anyone
should see why I value stability and continued viability. It's a long game
but the
potential payback to pyjamas could be huge *if* it can keep commercial users
on board.
This is where the existential threat to pyjamas comes from and why I and many
others
consider the takeover to be reckless and unjustified.
perhaps. in retrospect i would have approached some aspects a bit differently.
interestingly ... things seem to be panning out in ways that will benefit all
... isn't that right, James? to be honest though, of all the commercial users
i'm aware, none have responded as you describe.
this was not a lone wolf operation, and neither are discussions in flight. i
think if you temper your reactions, and turn down the volume, you will find
that things are shaping up rather well ... i am very much aware of the events
unfolding, as are you. whilst you paint me the enemy, new paths have been
opened ... achievement? unlocked!
Luke is a talented developer, there is no doubt of this, but he is one of
the most
socially inept persons i have ever encountered
I don't think this is the right place to bash people or even defend them on a
personal
level.
i'm doing neither. this is an mere observation after multiple years of
interaction, and my own research into past endeavors.
We get it though. You didn't get along with the guy.
well, no, i don't think you get it ... are you paying attention, at all? i got
along with him just fine; i've already detailed this elsewhere.
the idea was to retain Luke
I'm sorry but I don't believe this. Luke can speak for himself of course but
this is
not how you keep people on-board.
well, don't then :-(
... but several did, and it's the cross-my-heart-pinky-swear'in truth. after
many months of lengthy discussion it felt right. after 10 minutes of
reactionary thought it feels less right to you ... that's certainly
understandable, and maybe even correct. was it *really* the right thing to do?
maybe not, this was unprecedented. already however, great things are in
motion, and i feel good about the feedback received, outside and in.
he decided to play legal threats as the first card
He's claimed that you lifted data from his server without permission. I'm not
commenting
on that, but if it's true then this is a massive roadblock in the viability
of the
project. I for one don't want to be involved in it. Can you picture the scene
where a
developer or businessperaon goes into a meeting with very senior, very
conservative
executives trying to pitch a product, and it turns out there are serious
legal concerns
surrounding the technology platform?
unrelated ... the technology is freely available.
If it isn't true then perhaps you should put people's minds at rest by giving
a detailed
explanation of the whole mail server situation, including where the data
originated, where
it is now, how it got there and why the accidental mailing of so many people
occurred.
acting as an agent of the organization, i reinstated services people had
purposefully subscribed to, in accordance with an infrastructure transition.
these were pre-existing relationships to a service i managed. alas, i was
unaware of the reasons to -- or existence of -- joining a list, but opting for
nomail ... thus the state was reset, ie. resuming reception thereto.
following this realization, all existing members were simply requested to join
a new list at their willful discretion. data was/is neither leaked nor
compromised in any way.
if anything, organization leaders failed to register with the Ministry their
collection of personal data, and also failed to train agents on proper
handling, if need be.
... that's the official statement, but like i said 100 times, i don't give a
{explicit deleted} about
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 12/05/2012 08:10, anth...@xtfx.me wrote: On Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:06:47 AM UTC-5, james hedley wrote: My nose and my stomach give me a very strong feeling that something is very, very wrong with the pyjamas project. I've personally never used it, but given the adverse publicity I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi ya, Please don't attack me or pull me into the centre of this conflict... I don't have any idea of what is really happening here; other than that I've read on the python-list mailing list. Your right, I have never released any code, under any license of any description. I have only offered snippets of code to people/projects to be used as they see fit (besides my professional developments and private projects.) All I did was to answer a mail sent to me by Ian Kelly (who I don't konw nor have ever had any prior contact with) about releasing code under a license... And, what I said stands: once anyone releases code, they are bound by the license they released it under as much as anyone else that may use it and cannot then withdraw that code from the domain they released it to (except by maybe creating a new and different version.) Being dyslexic, my message (and this one) may not be worded in the best way but that is no reason to start on me! Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 22:56:43 -0300 From: ricar...@gmail.com To: cybor...@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack On 09/05/12 20:04, Adrian Hunt wrote: Hi Ian, Well there you have me... You release code under a license, you bound by it even if later you think better of it... Seller be ware!! Sorry, but you are not being accurate. You don't release code under a license, James Tauber did, or the Google Web Toolkit did. So you are in no positon to think better of it even if it was allowed to the original releaser. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Adrian Hunt cybor...@hotmail.com wrote: All I did was to answer a mail sent to me by Ian Kelly (who I don't konw nor have ever had any prior contact with) about releasing code under a license... And, what I said stands: once anyone releases code, they are bound by the license they released it under as much as anyone else that may use it and cannot then withdraw that code from the domain they released it to (except by maybe creating a new and different version.) And that's absolutely correct. Open source licenses are deliberately worded to guarantee rights in perpetuity, so there's no way to withdraw it or change the license (though of course a copyright owner can release the same code under an additional license). Being dyslexic, my message (and this one) may not be worded in the best way but that is no reason to start on me! Your message is fine. Believe you me, I'd much rather read a message posted by a non-native English speaker, or a dyslexic person, or someone who has a clinical aversion to the letter 'q', than someone who's simply sloppy and doesn't care about their language at all. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi there, Yes, it's very messy by what I understand and is why Merlio never had it's judgements enforced. Although, employment contracts that were in place at the time (including mine), were declared null and void... I think it was something like: if a programmer has an idea and uses it within an employers project then the employer has a legal claim to that implementation but not to the original idea. And, a contract that claims IP rights would stop a developer from ever working again as a programmer: this again, being illegal and making the contract null and void. With internationalization, the problem is compounded as different countries have different laws. Since my days at Merlio, I have managed to avoid singing any contract that claims IP and I have worked for some large international companies (from within the UK.) Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 10:27:27 +1000 Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack From: ros...@gmail.com To: python-list@python.org On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Google was a right PITA but eventually I found this http://www.legalcentre.co.uk/intellectual-property/guide/intellectual-property-and-employees/ It appears to contradict what you've said above, or have I misread it? E.g Under the (Patents) Act (1977), there is a presumption that an employer will own the patent of an invention made by its employee if the invention was made in the employee’s normal or specifically assigned duties and either, an invention might reasonably be expected to result from such duties or, the employee has a special obligation to further the employee’s interests, arising from the nature of those duties and responsibilities and the employee’s status. That's patents... intellectual property goes by other rules I think. I am not a lawyer, and I try to avoid getting placed in any position where this sort of thing will come up, because it's messy... especially with internationalization. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
lol, Cheers Chris. Just so you know, I care about what and how I write... I almost always run my emails though a word-processor before sending. And, that has paid off for me: thanks to MS Word, MS Works and Open Office, I have better understanding of correct punctuation use (if not spelling and grammar) than most school leavers!!! PS. It hasn't gone a miss that you are one of the core python-list responders (and I bet this goes for most of the python-list users): your responses, time and knowledge is appreciated... Thank you. Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 09:57:49 +1000 Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack From: ros...@gmail.com To: python-list@python.org On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Adrian Hunt cybor...@hotmail.com wrote: All I did was to answer a mail sent to me by Ian Kelly (who I don't konw nor have ever had any prior contact with) about releasing code under a license... And, what I said stands: once anyone releases code, they are bound by the license they released it under as much as anyone else that may use it and cannot then withdraw that code from the domain they released it to (except by maybe creating a new and different version.) And that's absolutely correct. Open source licenses are deliberately worded to guarantee rights in perpetuity, so there's no way to withdraw it or change the license (though of course a copyright owner can release the same code under an additional license). Being dyslexic, my message (and this one) may not be worded in the best way but that is no reason to start on me! Your message is fine. Believe you me, I'd much rather read a message posted by a non-native English speaker, or a dyslexic person, or someone who has a clinical aversion to the letter 'q', than someone who's simply sloppy and doesn't care about their language at all. Chris Angelico -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Adrian Hunt cybor...@hotmail.com wrote: lol, Cheers Chris. Just so you know, I care about what and how I write... I almost always run my emails though a word-processor before sending. And, that has paid off for me: thanks to MS Word, MS Works and Open Office, I have better understanding of correct punctuation use (if not spelling and grammar) than most school leavers!!! Absolutely. Taking care puts you miles ahead of the average (unfortunately for the average). I was home educated, and taught to value correctness, so I tend to speak and write more carefully than most do (people say I sound British for some reason - my accent doesn't sound Australian). That's why I tend to do a lot (note, not alot, though the cute drawings are fun) of copyediting. PS. It hasn't gone a miss that you are one of the core python-list responders (and I bet this goes for most of the python-list users): your responses, time and knowledge is appreciated... Thank you. Thanks! I'm just a guy who types fast, mainly; but I've been coding for about twenty years, and I'm always happy to help people. But this list is more for me to learn than for me to share. I've learned no end of things from these threads - it's awesome! ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi, I'm not big Python user but like to keep a eye on this mailing list as there are a few subjects that can be applied to other languages and just for general interest (Yes, I'm a geek!!! lol) This message thread has really shocked me: I've been a programmer for some thirty years and yes in the past I've had code/intellectual property stolen mainly by corporate bodies (well more like little upstart twats that cannot come up with ideas for themselves, acting in the name of a company.) I've never been able to do anything about it, proving that code and/or an idea has been stolen is not a simple thing to do... But surely in this case, as the project is so visibly the intellectual property of Luke that Risinger and his sheep are standing on the edge of a very large and loose cliff! To: python-list@python.org From: tjre...@udel.edu Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 21:35:22 -0400 On 5/8/2012 5:47 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: From what others have posted, it has a new code repository (that being the ostensible reason for the fork), project site, and mailing list -- the latter two incompetently. Apparently, the only thing he has kept are the domain and project names (the latter for sure not legitimately). Update: the pyjs.org group (or member thereof) has registered pyjs as a new project name on pypi and released pyjames0.8.1 as pyjs0.8.1. So they seem not to be claiming the name 'pyjames', at least not on pypi. -- Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Tuesday, May 8, 2012 4:10:13 AM UTC-5, james hedley wrote: Agreed with pretty much all of that. It's third-world politics, lurching from one dictator to another. Risinger seems to have banned all discussion of the subject from the list too, I'm not posting anymore because I don't want to give him an excuse to wield his newly found banhammer. hello James, i'm not really sure what you're referring too ... you appear to be making these things up. i have not banned anything, or even alluded to it, whatsoever. i asked that one specific mail not be commented upon, as a request; perhaps this is the dreaded bannhammer you speak of? reading your accounts strewn about is interesting, what exactly are *your* motives? a simple curiosity, nothing more. your comparison to gov'ts is pretty skewed i would say, you know this as well as i. regardless of what you think or know of me, i have a permanent track record of being pretty fair and receptive to virtually anything, and am involved in a wide range of projects. Luke is a talented developer, there is no doubt of this, but he is one of the most socially inept persons i have ever encountered. leading your users to statements such as this: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!searchin/pyjamas-dev/credo/pyjamas-dev/xzp4CCWhJN4/nQ3-emtYFVgJ ... dozens of times on several occasions, is truly incredible. other such behavior, eg. being the only person in the history of the webkit project to ever be *ejected* from contributing or communicating *at all*, is further testament to the deficiencies provoking this maneuver. however, i have no interest in comparing or being compared. go read my notes again; i have a high level of respect for Luke in many capacities, and this has not changed. lets make one thing perfectly clear; you are not the only one who cares of this project or wishes it to succeed. mistakes were made. problems were had. the decisions however, stands. But yeah, a lot of the commentary from the pro-rebel side ( not that any of them admit they had anything to do with it ) really does come across as being ill-informed and childish. indeed, you have witnessed little chatter. however, barring your belief of such, i had received dozens of notes thanking me and attesting to a renewed impetus for action. the original goal was to purchase a domain and fork -- i made this very clear in my notes -- `uxpy.net`. however, the most respectable member of the commit IMO convinced me otherwise. names names, yes you want names? sorry :-(. alas, he, myself, and numerous others are still active and moving forward. the list is actually approaching 100 ... not the 4-5 you so graciously quoted. i am simply the point man willing to stand the flurry. likewise, i did not convince the domain holder to give me the domain. not only was he already aware prior to me approaching him -- list member, passive -- he was more that willing to assist in reinstating the projects foundations and direction. he *was* the person who left Luke in charge ... why do you think he was the owner? as far as im concerned, the domain was already hijacked; this was, in good faith, intended as remedy. this was not a easy or light decision, the dissonance exists to this day. the idea was to retain Luke, but he decided to play legal threats as the first card (which i'm afraid can only backfire), before he even knew of the domain changes. hge is not a victim here, nor is anyone else. so please, show some cognitive capacity by realizing this is not as black-and-white as you's like it to be. when you decide to include yourself -- sooner, or later -- you are more than welcome. @alex23 ... try reading a bit further. as a human i am subject to annoyance and frustration. i probably shouldn't have started the message in that manner, but the absurdity and absolute inaccurate statements being made were rather upsetting. you will note that i make it perfectly clear that Luke is a fantastic developer, and a great part of the team. this of course has neither waned nor faltered. i encourage anyone willing to take the time to consult the archives, pyjamas' and elsewhere, as they are the only path to proper answers. this will impact the project in both known and untold ways, but we have a great number of minds willing to push beyond. -- C Anthony -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
It's also quite ironic that the initial complaining started from how the domain name www.pyjs.org is not available only pyjs.org is. At the same time the Rebel Chief's listed domain name on github, see https://github.com/xtfxme, gives you a server not found: http://the.xtfx.me/ :) On 5/9/12, anth...@xtfx.me anth...@xtfx.me wrote: On Tuesday, May 8, 2012 4:10:13 AM UTC-5, james hedley wrote: Agreed with pretty much all of that. It's third-world politics, lurching from one dictator to another. Risinger seems to have banned all discussion of the subject from the list too, I'm not posting anymore because I don't want to give him an excuse to wield his newly found banhammer. hello James, i'm not really sure what you're referring too ... you appear to be making these things up. i have not banned anything, or even alluded to it, whatsoever. i asked that one specific mail not be commented upon, as a request; perhaps this is the dreaded bannhammer you speak of? reading your accounts strewn about is interesting, what exactly are *your* motives? a simple curiosity, nothing more. your comparison to gov'ts is pretty skewed i would say, you know this as well as i. regardless of what you think or know of me, i have a permanent track record of being pretty fair and receptive to virtually anything, and am involved in a wide range of projects. Luke is a talented developer, there is no doubt of this, but he is one of the most socially inept persons i have ever encountered. leading your users to statements such as this: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!searchin/pyjamas-dev/credo/pyjamas-dev/xzp4CCWhJN4/nQ3-emtYFVgJ ... dozens of times on several occasions, is truly incredible. other such behavior, eg. being the only person in the history of the webkit project to ever be *ejected* from contributing or communicating *at all*, is further testament to the deficiencies provoking this maneuver. however, i have no interest in comparing or being compared. go read my notes again; i have a high level of respect for Luke in many capacities, and this has not changed. lets make one thing perfectly clear; you are not the only one who cares of this project or wishes it to succeed. mistakes were made. problems were had. the decisions however, stands. But yeah, a lot of the commentary from the pro-rebel side ( not that any of them admit they had anything to do with it ) really does come across as being ill-informed and childish. indeed, you have witnessed little chatter. however, barring your belief of such, i had received dozens of notes thanking me and attesting to a renewed impetus for action. the original goal was to purchase a domain and fork -- i made this very clear in my notes -- `uxpy.net`. however, the most respectable member of the commit IMO convinced me otherwise. names names, yes you want names? sorry :-(. alas, he, myself, and numerous others are still active and moving forward. the list is actually approaching 100 ... not the 4-5 you so graciously quoted. i am simply the point man willing to stand the flurry. likewise, i did not convince the domain holder to give me the domain. not only was he already aware prior to me approaching him -- list member, passive -- he was more that willing to assist in reinstating the projects foundations and direction. he *was* the person who left Luke in charge ... why do you think he was the owner? as far as im concerned, the domain was already hijacked; this was, in good faith, intended as remedy. this was not a easy or light decision, the dissonance exists to this day. the idea was to retain Luke, but he decided to play legal threats as the first card (which i'm afraid can only backfire), before he even knew of the domain changes. hge is not a victim here, nor is anyone else. so please, show some cognitive capacity by realizing this is not as black-and-white as you's like it to be. when you decide to include yourself -- sooner, or later -- you are more than welcome. @alex23 ... try reading a bit further. as a human i am subject to annoyance and frustration. i probably shouldn't have started the message in that manner, but the absurdity and absolute inaccurate statements being made were rather upsetting. you will note that i make it perfectly clear that Luke is a fantastic developer, and a great part of the team. this of course has neither waned nor faltered. i encourage anyone willing to take the time to consult the archives, pyjamas' and elsewhere, as they are the only path to proper answers. this will impact the project in both known and untold ways, but we have a great number of minds willing to push beyond. -- C Anthony -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
the original goal was to purchase a domain and fork -- i made this very clear in my notes -- `uxpy.net`. however, the most respectable member of the commit IMO convinced me otherwise. (I'm a total outsider, never used pyjs.) Anthony, you never explained what the reasoning behind the advice of the most respectable member of the commit was. Why didn't you finally buy the new domain name, pick a new name, and fork the project? As it stands now the obvious answer for most people is because it looked easier to just take over than to build a new community, new infrastructure, new fame, etc, and I sure as hell like to take the easy road as opposed to the hard road. Until you clearly explain your reasoning for taking over as opposed to forking, the default answer is the above one. Cheers, Daniel -- Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
If the support you have from the other contributors is anywhere near what you claim it is, I may as well be kissing Pyjamas goodbye. Doubt it, though - this whole post reeks of vagueities and doublespeak garbage. Too many undefined whos. I'll wait until Leighton gets the reins back. And you know what? Leighton was right to threaten legal action. What you did was not only in violation of his IP, but also multiple data theft laws. ~Temia -- When on earth, do as the earthlings do. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Temia Eszteri lamial...@cleverpun.com wrote: And you know what? Leighton was right to threaten legal action. What you did was not only in violation of his IP, but also multiple data theft laws. As far as copyright goes, it was open source, so he's allowed to continue making modifications. I don't think Luke had any patents. There might be something with stealing the name PyJS (which was, AFAIK, used as a synonym for PyJamas) -- apparently common law trademark is a thing. Otherwise... The domain was apparently not directly owned by Luke (but pointed to a server luke administered), and its transfer was apparently consensual. It seems like nearly every evil thing the hijacker did is legally permissible. The one other thing was the way he created the new mailing list might not have been legal, apparently. (See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-May/1291804.html ). -- Devin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 09/05/2012 12:02, anth...@xtfx.me wrote: cut all Hello C Anthony, I am an pyjs user and introduced the project as one of the fundamental parts of a new application that is now core of a company of a reasonable size (30+), customers include several companies in the top 10 of largest IT infrastructures, I can mail you a list in private if you wish so. I agree that the project leadership had certainly room for improvement. I also agree that to move forward there had to be made some choices. However, as the person introducing this project in a commercial venture, I am also the one having the responsibility of it in my setting. I have been put in a position where I have to come up with answers, like why the examples page didn't work, why the project seems fragile and if there is any viability at all. Of course, I still believe in the project, with all it warts and so forth. However my position has been made needlessly difficult, because the action you took did not leave room for choice. Let me explain this, if you had forked the project, created a new domain, mailing list and, took over the majority of the devs, I would be able to make a choice if I go with the new guys or stick with the couple of old ones, just like the xorg fork. If your argument is that this was your intention but was persuaded to do other wise, I would say that is a lapse of judgement and not a very good restart of the project. Unfortunately mistakes made in public, even if arguably they are not mistakes at all, are not easy forgotten and can end up haunting you. I hope you will take these comments with you as a lesson learned, I do wish you all the best and look forward to the improvements you are going to contribute. -- Martin P. Hellwig (mph) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi ya, Not to be confrontative but just because a project is open-source, it doesn't mean IP is open too!! The original idea is still property of the originator... It just has the global community adding their own IP and fixes. This is a core of corporate contracts ensuring that a developers IP become freely usable by the company they work for at the time, but their IP is still their IP. In the UK at least, a developers IP cannot be hijacked by a company contract. If you write some code while working for X, then X has free usage of that IP and may restrict you from using the same IP for company Y, but only for a limited time (ie 5 years)… The IP you came up with is still yours and a contract that claims your IP can (and has been in a court of law) judged to be null and void. The problem is proving it!!! From: jeanpierr...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:00:11 -0400 Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack To: lamial...@cleverpun.com CC: python-list@python.org On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Temia Eszteri lamial...@cleverpun.com wrote: And you know what? Leighton was right to threaten legal action. What you did was not only in violation of his IP, but also multiple data theft laws. As far as copyright goes, it was open source, so he's allowed to continue making modifications. I don't think Luke had any patents. There might be something with stealing the name PyJS (which was, AFAIK, used as a synonym for PyJamas) -- apparently common law trademark is a thing. Otherwise... The domain was apparently not directly owned by Luke (but pointed to a server luke administered), and its transfer was apparently consensual. It seems like nearly every evil thing the hijacker did is legally permissible. The one other thing was the way he created the new mailing list might not have been legal, apparently. (See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-May/1291804.html ). -- Devin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 09/05/2012 23:30, Adrian Hunt wrote: In the UK at least, a developers IP cannot be hijacked by a company contract. If you write some code while working for X, then X has free usage of that IP and may restrict you from using the same IP for company Y, but only for a limited time (ie 5 years)… The IP you came up with is still yours and a contract that claims your IP can (and has been in a court of law) judged to be null and void. References please, as this is completely opposite to my understanding. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Adrian Hunt cybor...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi ya, Not to be confrontative but just because a project is open-source, it doesn't mean IP is open too!! The original idea is still property of the originator... It just has the global community adding their own IP and fixes. This is a core of corporate contracts ensuring that a developers IP become freely usable by the company they work for at the time, but their IP is still their IP. Luke Leighton was not the originator of the project. James Tauber was, and his original code was a port of Google Web Toolkit. Even if Luke could somehow be considered the owner of the project, it was released under the Apache License, which includes a /perpetual/, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, /irrevocable/ copyright license to reproduce, /prepare Derivative Works of/, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works. I don't agree with what Anthony has done, but I don't see how it violates the license in any way or how Luke has any possible recourse through IP claims. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi Ian, Well there you have me... You release code under a license, you bound by it even if later you think better of it... Seller be ware!! From: ian.g.ke...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 16:59:00 -0600 Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack To: cybor...@hotmail.com On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Adrian Hunt cybor...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi ya, Not to be confrontative but just because a project is open-source, it doesn't mean IP is open too!! The original idea is still property of the originator... It just has the global community adding their own IP and fixes. This is a core of corporate contracts ensuring that a developers IP become freely usable by the company they work for at the time, but their IP is still their IP. Luke Leighton was not the originator of the project. James Tauber was, and his original code was a port of Google Web Toolkit. Even if Luke could somehow be considered the owner of the project, it was released under the Apache License, which includes a /perpetual/, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, /irrevocable/ copyright license to reproduce, /prepare Derivative Works of/, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works. I don't agree with what Anthony has done, but I don't see how it violates the license in any way or how Luke has any possible recourse through IP claims. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Hi there Mark There has been a few that I know of but going back quite a long time... Soon after I got my qualifications, a small company called Merlio, not only did the court case get passed in UK courts by it went to the European court too... I wasn't directly involved but I know the EU court upheld the decision of the UK courts. Still there are was little to no enforcement of what they decided!!! Any how IP IS the IP of the developer... Proving it and enforcing it is another matter!! To: python-list@python.org From: breamore...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 23:44:01 +0100 On 09/05/2012 23:30, Adrian Hunt wrote: In the UK at least, a developers IP cannot be hijacked by a company contract. If you write some code while working for X, then X has free usage of that IP and may restrict you from using the same IP for company Y, but only for a limited time (ie 5 years)… The IP you came up with is still yours and a contract that claims your IP can (and has been in a court of law) judged to be null and void. References please, as this is completely opposite to my understanding. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 10/05/2012 00:19, Adrian Hunt wrote: Hi there Mark There has been a few that I know of but going back quite a long time... Soon after I got my qualifications, a small company called Merlio, not only did the court case get passed in UK courts by it went to the European court too... I wasn't directly involved but I know the EU court upheld the decision of the UK courts. Still there are was little to no enforcement of what they decided!!! Any how IP IS the IP of the developer... Proving it and enforcing it is another matter!! To: python-list@python.org From: breamore...@yahoo.co.uk Subject: Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 23:44:01 +0100 On 09/05/2012 23:30, Adrian Hunt wrote: In the UK at least, a developers IP cannot be hijacked by a company contract. If you write some code while working for X, then X has free usage of that IP and may restrict you from using the same IP for company Y, but only for a limited time (ie 5 years)… The IP you came up with is still yours and a contract that claims your IP can (and has been in a court of law) judged to be null and void. References please, as this is completely opposite to my understanding. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list Google was a right PITA but eventually I found this http://www.legalcentre.co.uk/intellectual-property/guide/intellectual-property-and-employees/ It appears to contradict what you've said above, or have I misread it? E.g Under the (Patents) Act (1977), there is a presumption that an employer will own the patent of an invention made by its employee if the invention was made in the employee’s normal or specifically assigned duties and either, an invention might reasonably be expected to result from such duties or, the employee has a special obligation to further the employee’s interests, arising from the nature of those duties and responsibilities and the employee’s status. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Google was a right PITA but eventually I found this http://www.legalcentre.co.uk/intellectual-property/guide/intellectual-property-and-employees/ It appears to contradict what you've said above, or have I misread it? E.g Under the (Patents) Act (1977), there is a presumption that an employer will own the patent of an invention made by its employee if the invention was made in the employee’s normal or specifically assigned duties and either, an invention might reasonably be expected to result from such duties or, the employee has a special obligation to further the employee’s interests, arising from the nature of those duties and responsibilities and the employee’s status. That's patents... intellectual property goes by other rules I think. I am not a lawyer, and I try to avoid getting placed in any position where this sort of thing will come up, because it's messy... especially with internationalization. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 10/05/2012 01:27, Chris Angelico wrote: On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Mark Lawrencebreamore...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Google was a right PITA but eventually I found this http://www.legalcentre.co.uk/intellectual-property/guide/intellectual-property-and-employees/ It appears to contradict what you've said above, or have I misread it? E.g Under the (Patents) Act (1977), there is a presumption that an employer will own the patent of an invention made by its employee if the invention was made in the employee’s normal or specifically assigned duties and either, an invention might reasonably be expected to result from such duties or, the employee has a special obligation to further the employee’s interests, arising from the nature of those duties and responsibilities and the employee’s status. That's patents... intellectual property goes by other rules I think. I am not a lawyer, and I try to avoid getting placed in any position where this sort of thing will come up, because it's messy... especially with internationalization. ChrisA The title of the referenced page is Intellectual Property and Employees. My quote is from the Employees and Patents section, but there are several more sections, so it appears that patents are a part of the intellectual property rule set. I'm with you on avoiding this type of situation, but sadly the whole pyjamas issue is a right pig's ear :( -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 10May2012 10:27, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: | On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: | Google was a right PITA but eventually I found this | http://www.legalcentre.co.uk/intellectual-property/guide/intellectual-property-and-employees/ | It appears to contradict what you've said above, or have I misread it? E.g | Under the (Patents) Act (1977), there is a presumption that an employer | will own the patent of an invention made by its employee if the invention | was made in the employee’s normal or specifically assigned duties and | either, an invention might reasonably be expected to result from such duties | or, the employee has a special obligation to further the employee’s | interests, arising from the nature of those duties and responsibilities and | the employee’s status. | | That's patents... intellectual property goes by other rules I think. Patents _are_ IP. You may mean copyright, also IP. Copyright goes to the author, except that most companies require employees to assign it to the company, including the Berne Convention moral rights (such as attribution). Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au DoD#743 http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/ People are paid for coming in the morning and leaving at night, and for saying Good morning in the morning and Good afternoon in the afternoon and never confusing the two. - Albert Shanker, president of the American Federation of Teachers -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au wrote: Patents _are_ IP. You may mean copyright, also IP. Copyright goes to the author, except that most companies require employees to assign it to the company, including the Berne Convention moral rights (such as attribution). Oh. Thanks, I stand corrected. Like I said, not a lawyer. :) ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Agreed with pretty much all of that. It's third-world politics, lurching from one dictator to another. Risinger seems to have banned all discussion of the subject from the list too, I'm not posting anymore because I don't want to give him an excuse to wield his newly found banhammer. But yeah, a lot of the commentary from the pro-rebel side ( not that any of them admit they had anything to do with it ) really does come across as being ill-informed and childish. This story is on reddit, if anyone is that way inclined: http://www.reddit.com/r/opensource/comments/t5acr/project_hijacked_advice_from_experience_foss/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Tue, 2012-05-08 at 15:20 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: I hope that pyjamas can be restored at some point to a single live project. Whether that's headed by Luke Leighton or C Anthony Risinger (neither of whom I know at all and thus I can't speak to either's merits) or someone else, I don't particularly care I have met Luke (At Europython), and honestly it was his enthusiasm that got me to look at pyjamas in the first place. To be fair I still haven't used it in anger, but I've poked around a lot, it's been under consideration for several bits of work. Although I don't think I've met C Anthony Risinger, his behaviour has seriously put me off the project - and if I consider using it in the future I'm going to be pricing in the cost of maintaining a complete local fork as part of the decision. Tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote: I hope that pyjamas can be restored at some point to a single live project. Whether that's headed by Luke Leighton or C Anthony Risinger (neither of whom I know at all and thus I can't speak to either's merits) or someone else, I don't particularly care, but frankly, I don't think there's need in the world for a fork of such a project. Aside from philosophical disagreements, what would be the differences between the Luke fork and the Anthony fork? Could anyone explain, to a prospective user, why s/he should pick one or the other? If not, the projects need to merge, or else one will die a sad death of stagnation. There is no both projects. there was Luke's project, and then Risinger stole it and it's Risinger's project. There is only that one thing -- Luke has no fork of his own codebase. I guess it won't die of stagnation, eh? It'll be a perfectly usable, stable project, led by a thief. -- Devin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Devin Jeanpierre jeanpierr...@gmail.com wrote: There is no both projects. there was Luke's project, and then Risinger stole it and it's Risinger's project. There is only that one thing -- Luke has no fork of his own codebase. Presumably Luke could fork his own project, though. I haven't checked, but presumably the source is properly managed, so it can be forked as of any point in time. But it's pretty nasty to have to fork your own project. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 5/8/2012 9:47 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Devin Jeanpierre jeanpierr...@gmail.com wrote: There is no both projects. there was Luke's project, and then Risinger stole it and it's Risinger's project. There is only that one thing -- Luke has no fork of his own codebase. Presumably Luke could fork his own project, though. I haven't checked, but presumably the source is properly managed, so it can be forked as of any point in time. But it's pretty nasty to have to fork your own project. You still have it backwards. Risinger forked the project with a new code host and mailing list, but stole the name and and some data in the process and made the false claim that his fork was the original. It is not clear if he damaged anything in the process. If Luke continues his original project, it would still be the true pyjamas project, not a fork. -- Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote: On 5/8/2012 9:47 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Devin Jeanpierre jeanpierr...@gmail.com wrote: There is no both projects. there was Luke's project, and then Risinger stole it and it's Risinger's project. There is only that one thing -- Luke has no fork of his own codebase. Presumably Luke could fork his own project, though. I haven't checked, but presumably the source is properly managed, so it can be forked as of any point in time. But it's pretty nasty to have to fork your own project. You still have it backwards. Risinger forked the project with a new code host and mailing list, but stole the name and and some data in the process and made the false claim that his fork was the original. It is not clear if he damaged anything in the process. Yes, but now that it's happened, the most obvious way forward is to fork the hijacked project back to the original, given that the hijacked one is being posted as the original. If Luke continues his original project, it would still be the true pyjamas project, not a fork. Yeah, but if he doesn't have command of the domain any more, then he'll likely be spawning it under a new name somewhere. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 5/8/2012 12:42 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Terry Reedytjre...@udel.edu wrote: You still have it backwards. Risinger forked the project with a new code host and mailing list, but stole the name and and some data in the process and made the false claim that his fork was the original. It is not clear if he damaged anything in the process. Yes, but now that it's happened, the most obvious way forward is to fork the hijacked project back to the original, given that the hijacked one is being posted as the original. Risinger's fork is NOT the original, no matter what his claim. People should not give credit to his false claim or regard it as an accomplished fact. From what others have posted, it has a new code repository (that being the ostensible reason for the fork), project site, and mailing list -- the latter two incompetently. Apparently, the only thing he has kept are the domain and project names (the latter for sure not legitimately). Luke has not abandoned pyjamas and has not, as of now, ceded ownership of the name to anyone. I am pretty sure Luke he has no plans to adandon his current codebase and and re-fork off of the Risinger et al revised codebase. If Luke continues his original project, it would still be the true pyjamas project, not a fork. Yeah, but if he doesn't have command of the domain any more, then he'll likely be spawning it under a new name somewhere. Yes, but so what? The domain name is not the project. Open source projects change domain names all the time (though hopefully rarely for any particular project). -- Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 08/05/2012 22:47, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 5/8/2012 12:42 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Terry Reedytjre...@udel.edu wrote:
You still have it backwards. Risinger forked the project with a new code
host and mailing list, but stole the name and and some data in the
process
and made the false claim that his fork was the original. It is not
clear if
he damaged anything in the process.
Yes, but now that it's happened, the most obvious way forward is to
fork the hijacked project back to the original, given that the
hijacked one is being posted as the original.
Risinger's fork is NOT the original, no matter what his claim. People
should not give credit to his false claim or regard it as an
accomplished fact.
From what others have posted, it has a new code repository (that being
the ostensible reason for the fork), project site, and mailing list --
the latter two incompetently. Apparently, the only thing he has kept are
the domain and project names (the latter for sure not legitimately).
Luke has not abandoned pyjamas and has not, as of now, ceded ownership
of the name to anyone. I am pretty sure Luke he has no plans to adandon
his current codebase and and re-fork off of the Risinger et al revised
codebase.
If Luke continues his original project, it would still be the true
pyjamas
project, not a fork.
Yeah, but if he doesn't have command of the domain any more, then
he'll likely be spawning it under a new name somewhere.
Yes, but so what? The domain name is not the project. Open source
projects change domain names all the time (though hopefully rarely for
any particular project).
{Not replying To Terry Reedy or anybody else specifically, but didn't
know where to jump in]
Who cares, in the sense that zero people (apart from five(ish) morons)
will follow the hijacked project, while the vast majority will support
Luke as a matter of principal. I suggest the thieves be subjected to
this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Send_to_Coventry
--
Cheers.
Mark Lawrence.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On 5/8/2012 5:47 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: From what others have posted, it has a new code repository (that being the ostensible reason for the fork), project site, and mailing list -- the latter two incompetently. Apparently, the only thing he has kept are the domain and project names (the latter for sure not legitimately). Update: the pyjs.org group (or member thereof) has registered pyjs as a new project name on pypi and released pyjames0.8.1 as pyjs0.8.1. So they seem not to be claiming the name 'pyjames', at least not on pypi. -- Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: A.k.a. we had to destroy the project in order to save it. http://technogems.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/pyjamas-hijacked.html Great summary, very handily peppered with links to appropriate posts. Seriously, this was a remarkably ham-fisted and foolish way to resolve a dispute over the direction of an open source project. That's the sort of thing that gives open source a bad reputation. I'd probably be on the side of the dissidents in terms of philosophy - freedom is there to be used, but if it costs you too much (effort, quality, etc) to use all-free-software, the cart's involved in equine artistry. You want a wiki? Throw down MySQL and MediaWiki. Want hosting? GitHub is fine. I don't restrict my hardware purchases to free BIOS or no sale. But a backstabbing takeover is not doing anyone any good. Especially not the reputation of the project. Here at work we have some familiarity with Python, and my boss is just starting to learn Javascript (after our main JS developer left); but there's no way that I'm going to consider introducing pyjamas / pyjs until this is resolved. (The sad thing is, when closed source software developers do this sort of thing, it gets blamed on bad apples; when open source developers do it, it gets used as an indictment on the entire FOSS community.) It's not quite as mixed-standards as that. If you see Microsoft or Apple charging a fortune for trivial upgrades and/or bug fixes, you blame it on corporate development. And some low-quality software in the FOSS market is acknowledged as you get what you pay for, although that one can backfire too. But yes, it's a harsh reality that one open-source community's actions reflect badly on another. (Which is why I want to be really REALLY careful of using the term open source here at work. Just because we let people have the source code to certain scripts etc does not mean we should use that term. Just sayin'.) I hope that pyjamas can be restored at some point to a single live project. Whether that's headed by Luke Leighton or C Anthony Risinger (neither of whom I know at all and thus I can't speak to either's merits) or someone else, I don't particularly care, but frankly, I don't think there's need in the world for a fork of such a project. Aside from philosophical disagreements, what would be the differences between the Luke fork and the Anthony fork? Could anyone explain, to a prospective user, why s/he should pick one or the other? If not, the projects need to merge, or else one will die a sad death of stagnation. ChrisA -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
On May 8, 1:54 pm, Steven D'Aprano steve +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote: Seriously, this was a remarkably ham-fisted and foolish way to resolve a dispute over the direction of an open source project. That's the sort of thing that gives open source a bad reputation. The arrogance and sense of entitlement was so thick you could choke on it. Here's a sampling from the circle jerk of self-justification that flooded my inbox over the weekend: i did not need to consult Luke, nor would that have be productive No, it's generally _not_ productive to ask someone if you can steal their project from them. i have retired Luke of the management duties, particularly, *above* the source Who is this C Anthony Risinger asshole and in what way did he _hire_ the lead developer? What I have wondered is, what are effects of having the project hostage to the whims of an individuals often illogically radical software libre beliefs which are absolutely not up for discussion at all with anyone. What I'm wondering is: how is the new set up any different? Why were Luke Leighton's philosophies/whims any more right or wrong than those held by the new Gang of Dicks? Further more, the reason I think it's a bad idea to have this drawn out discussion is that pretty much the main reason for this fork is because of Luke leadership and project management decisions and actions. To have discussions of why the fork was done would invariably lead to quite a bit of personal attacks and petty arguments. Apparently it's nicer to steal someone's work than be mean to them. I agree, Lex - this is all about moving on. This is a software project, not a cult of personality. Because recognising the effort of the lead developer is cult-like. My only quibble is with the term fork. A fork is created when you disagree with the technical direction of a project. That's not the issue here. This is a reassignment of the project administration only - a shuffling of responsibility among *current leaders* of the community. There is no divine right of kings here. My quibble is over the term fork too, as this is outright theft. I don't remember the community acknowledging _any other leadership_ over Luke Leighton's. I suspect Luke will be busy with other projects and not do much more for Pyjamas/pyjs, Luke correct me if you see this and I am wrong. How about letting the man make his own fucking decisions? All of you spamming the list with your unsubscribe attempts: Anthony mentioned in a previous email that he's using mailman now Apparently it's the responsibility of the person who was subscribed without their permission to find out the correct mechanism for unsubscribing from that list. apparantly a bunch of people were marked as POSTING in the DB, but not receiving mail (?) Oh I see, the sudden rush of email I received was due to an error in the data they stole... Nobody wins if we spend any amount of time debating the details of this transition, what's done is done. Truly the justification of assholes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack
Even worse, here's what Risinger had to say when Leighton asked them to stop sending him email: probably best not to feed the troll, Pascal -- especially one overwrought and lost in high dudgeon -- they tend to brickwall common reason and simple social advices. Luke has made his decision -- and burned all ties -- by pitching a snit of hollow threats i full-heartily recommend that everyone do exactly as Luke requests, i.e. cease and desist from all communications with him, regarding this project's past or future ... There's being an asshole, and then there's being an absolute fucking asshole. It seems pretty clear which category this behaviour falls in. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
