Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-14 Thread Christian Couder
Hi, On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Thomas Adam tho...@xteddy.org wrote: So these guidelines gain the community nothing, and only serve to punish those who are already following them, without them being written down, because the root-cause of the problem is still here, and isn't going to go

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-13 Thread Thomas Adam
Hello, On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 06:58:47PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: I've tried to write down a bare minimum, without restating the obvious. [...] I often come across so-called community guidelines in other projects---some of which adhere to them quite strictly, and others simply

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-13 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:19 AM, Thomas Adam tho...@xteddy.org wrote: It's a point on which one is never going to win, because no matter what one says, it'll just get twisted round in such a way that one then ends up questioning their own words, and their own conduct, and that's bad, because

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
John Keeping wrote: On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:16:28AM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: John Keeping wrote: Ugh, why this roundabout-passive-past tone? Use imperative tone like this: ... vs. We normally use the imperative in commit messages, perhaps like

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:10:11PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Presumably, Felipe is the fire hazard that we are talking about, and nobody else is to blame. He must be removed to prevent future fires. This is the perception of the regulars, correct? Then why haven't you removed

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Jeff King wrote: And I think that is where the benevolent dictator role comes in. They weigh not just the points made in the discussion (or a summary of it), but also use their judgement on who is making comments (how many people, the utility of their past comments) and other factors (other

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Theodore Ts'o
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 06:19:23PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: Fair? Fairness requires to judge each action without biases, nor double standards. In the case of an open source community it requires you to listen to the arguments before dismissing them, and consider the patches before

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Theodore Ts'o wrote: But if people who *are* senior developers in the git community decide, on their own, that someone isn't worth listening to, there's the punishment has been inflicted, and this happens without banning someone from posting or removing them from the mailing list. Yes, I have

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Theodore Ts'o ty...@mit.edu wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:10:11PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Presumably, Felipe is the fire hazard that we are talking about, and nobody else is to blame. He must be removed to prevent future fires. This is the

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Theodore Ts'o ty...@mit.edu wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 06:19:23PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: Fair? Fairness requires to judge each action without biases, nor double standards. In the case of an open source community it requires you to listen to the

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Jakub Narebski
Philip Oakley philipoakley at iee.org writes: From: Michael Haggerty mhagger at alum.mit.edu Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:52 PM As my mother would say, politeness costs nothing Does your mother program C? We could use her around here I think she programmed in Smalltalk and

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Junio C Hamano
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: I would prefer a community standards document that looks more like this: ... * Be welcoming to new community participants. Help them get oriented, and be patient with their questions. Gently introduce them to our community standards, above all

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Philip Oakley
From: Jakub Narebski jna...@gmail.com Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:49 PM Philip Oakley philipoakley at iee.org writes: From: Michael Haggerty mhagger at alum.mit.edu Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:52 PM As my mother would say, politeness costs nothing Does your mother program C? We

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/12/2013 10:02 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: I would prefer a community standards document that looks more like this: ... * Be welcoming to new community participants. Help them get oriented, and be patient with their questions. Gently

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-12 Thread Junio C Hamano
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: On 06/12/2013 10:02 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Coaching new contributors, like mentoring GSoC students, is often more time consuming than scratching the same itch yourself for any reviewer, but it is an investment, which hopefully yields dividend

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:41 PM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu wrote: On 06/10/2013 03:28 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: I've tried to write down a bare minimum, without restating the obvious. Thank you for drafting a proposed CommunityGuidelines document; I think such a document

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Junio C Hamano wrote: The intent behind the document might be a noble one, but I am afraid that the text is too broad and vague and does not address the real issue to be of practical use. Drafting something like this is shit work, which explains why nobody has attempted it yet. I have no

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Michael Haggerty wrote: Thank you for drafting a proposed CommunityGuidelines document; I think such a document would be helpful. But I don't like the overall flavor of your proposal; frankly, it sounds to me more like

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Felipe Contreras wrote: I think there's an even more important number 0: Always assume good faith. When discussing through digital mediums, it's very easy to misconstrue the tone and intentions of other parties, so it's better to err on the side of caution, and if one is mistaken, assuming

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:45 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: Whether or not you were justified in being offended is nobody's business. In a parallel with law, there is no concept of justly offended, precisely because there is no way to determine what that even means. People

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Thomas Rast
Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes: Michael Haggerty wrote: Thank you for drafting a proposed CommunityGuidelines document; I think such a document would be helpful. But I don't like the overall flavor of your proposal; frankly, it sounds to me more like

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Thomas Rast wrote: It has become clear, also in discussion on IRC, that your preferred approach is to fight the fires, attempting to extinguish flames as they happen. Incorrect. I am interested in minimizing occurrences, which is why I started this thread: to calmly and rationally discuss how

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/11/2013 03:40 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Is it because you have realized deep down that you have absolutely no rational argument...Why are you incapable of using your words to counter my arguments rationally?Are you so blind that you cannot see the consequences of acting without

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: My approach -- and in my perception also that preferred by most of the regulars who have spoken in this whole mess -- is that since there is a fire hazard, it would be more effective firefighting to just remove the hazard,

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
Hi, Before going to your arguments, can you stop conveniently *ignoring* my argument and answer this questions? When two children fight, who has the blame? The one that threw the first punch? Or the one that returned it? On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Thomas Rast
Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: My approach -- and in my perception also that preferred by most of the regulars who have spoken in this whole mess -- is that since there is a fire hazard, it would be

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: My approach -- and in my perception also that preferred by most of the regulars who have spoken in

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Thomas Rast
Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: * Accept reviewers' comments gratefully and take them very seriously. Show that you appreciate the help by giving the reviewer the benefit of the doubt. If, after careful consideration, you find that you cannot agree with a reviewer's suggestion,

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Thomas Rast tr...@inf.ethz.ch wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: * Accept reviewers' comments gratefully and take them very seriously. Show that you appreciate the help by giving the reviewer the benefit of the doubt. If, after careful

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
This is an exercise. I can easily be more tactful (as evidenced by other threads), but I'm choosing not to be. I want you to focus on the argument, and not the tone. Michael Haggerty wrote: Ram, you are insulting Thomas the human being rather than addressing his points. Please stop. He

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/11/2013 07:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: [...] * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive. Set high expectations, but do what you can to help the submitter achieve them. Don't demand changes based only on your

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread John Keeping
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:00:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive. Set high expectations, but do what you can to help the submitter achieve them. Don't demand changes based only

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/11/2013 08:16 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: This is an exercise. I can easily be more tactful (as evidenced by other threads), but I'm choosing not to be. I want you to focus on the argument, and not the tone. I stopped reading your email here. I've read enough tactless emails over

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
John Keeping wrote: Ugh, why this roundabout-passive-past tone? Use imperative tone like this: ... vs. We normally use the imperative in commit messages, perhaps like this? ... As my mother would say, politeness costs nothing ;-) The review is being

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/11/2013 08:29 PM, John Keeping wrote: On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:00:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes: * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive. Set high expectations, but do what you can to help the submitter achieve

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Michael Haggerty wrote: I stopped reading your email here. I've read enough tactless emails over the last few days, but to be asked to read an email that was *intentionally* written tactlessly is too detrimental to my quality of life. I'm sorry, but the problem has no solution then. The

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes: Michael Haggerty wrote: I stopped reading your email here. I've read enough tactless emails over the last few days, but to be asked to read an email that was *intentionally* written tactlessly is too detrimental to my quality of life. I'm

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread John Keeping
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 08:52:05PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: That's a very good point (and a good illustration, too). How do you like the new second and third sentences below? * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive. Remember that submitting patches for public

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, John Keeping j...@keeping.me.uk wrote: I realise that we shouldn't take offence to review comments, but we are all human and it is sometimes hard not to take things personally. In the examples above, the first makes it feel like the submitter is fighting to

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com writes: I'm sorry, but the problem has no solution then. The problem we are dealing with is irrational and/or out-of-tone emails. Unless you possess some mind-control mechanism

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Philip Oakley
From: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:52 PM [...] That's a very good point (and a good illustration, too). How do you like the new second and third sentences below? * When reviewing other peoples' code, be tactful and constructive. Remember that submitting

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread John Keeping
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:16:28AM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: John Keeping wrote: Ugh, why this roundabout-passive-past tone? Use imperative tone like this: ... vs. We normally use the imperative in commit messages, perhaps like this?

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Brandon Casey
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu wrote: At the risk of being presumptuous myself, I suggest that you show a copy of your email to somebody whom you know and respect in the real world, somebody who is not immersed in the Git community meltdown. For

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Jeff King
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:00:56AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: * Accept reviewers' comments gratefully and take them very seriously. Show that you appreciate the help by giving the reviewer the benefit of the doubt. If, after careful consideration, you find that you cannot agree with a

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: So there are no hard rules, and this is not a democracy[1]. For the most part the community runs itself in an open and collective fashion, and the dictator's job is easy; but ultimately, he or she is in charge of what gets applied and what doesn't. Rules like

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Jeff King p...@peff.net writes: So there are no hard rules, and this is not a democracy[1]. For the most part the community runs itself in an open and collective fashion, and the dictator's job is easy; but ultimately,

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu wrote: On 06/11/2013 08:16 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: This is an exercise. I can easily be more tactful (as evidenced by other threads), but I'm choosing not to be. I want you to focus on the argument, and not the

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-11 Thread John Szakmeister
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Philip Oakley philipoak...@iee.org wrote: From: Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 7:52 PM [...] That's a very good point (and a good illustration, too). How do you like the new second and third sentences below? * When

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Célestin Matte
Le 10/06/2013 15:28, Ramkumar Ramachandra a écrit : 0. You do not take offense, no matter what. If someone attacks you irrationally, you do not respond. This is a public mailing list, and we are all rational people: the attacker has already humiliated herself in public, and everyone can see

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Matthieu Moy
Célestin Matte celestin.ma...@ensimag.fr writes: Le 10/06/2013 15:28, Ramkumar Ramachandra a écrit : 0. You do not take offense, no matter what. If someone attacks you irrationally, you do not respond. This is a public mailing list, and we are all rational people: the attacker has already

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:04:29PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: Célestin Matte celestin.ma...@ensimag.fr writes: Le 10/06/2013 15:28, Ramkumar Ramachandra a écrit : 0. You do not take offense, no matter what. If someone attacks you irrationally, you do not respond. This is a public

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Junio C Hamano wrote: 0. You do not take offense, no matter what. If someone attacks you irrationally, you do not respond. This is a public mailing list, and we are all rational people: the attacker has already humiliated herself in public, and everyone can see that. [...]

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Jonathan Nieder wrote: I don't think most bystanders would misunderstand if I let a certain person alone instead of responding and saying You are being unproductive. Please stop. But that certain person seems to misunderstand, whether I say that or not. So when I lose patience I say so,

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread A Large Angry SCM
On 06/10/2013 03:45 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: [...] It is absolutely imperative to keep all our contributors productive, and maximize output. Why? A useful product with a maintainable code base are what seems to be more important to a successful open source effort. A Large Angry

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
A Large Angry SCM wrote: It is absolutely imperative to keep all our contributors productive, and maximize output. Why? A useful product with a maintainable code base are what seems to be more important to a successful open source effort. Doesn't a successful open source effort (with a

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread A Large Angry SCM
On 06/10/2013 04:56 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: A Large Angry SCM wrote: It is absolutely imperative to keep all our contributors productive, and maximize output. Why? A useful product with a maintainable code base are what seems to be more important to a successful open source effort.

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 06/10/2013 03:28 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: I've tried to write down a bare minimum, without restating the obvious. Thank you for drafting a proposed CommunityGuidelines document; I think such a document would be helpful. But I don't like the overall flavor of your proposal; frankly, it

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com wrote: Robin H. Johnson robb...@gentoo.org writes: On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 04:04:29PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote: Célestin Matte celestin.ma...@ensimag.fr writes: Le 10/06/2013 15:28, Ramkumar Ramachandra a écrit : 0. You

Re: [PATCH] Documentation/CommunityGuidelines

2013-06-10 Thread Felipe Contreras
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra artag...@gmail.com wrote: I've tried to write down a bare minimum, without restating the obvious. I think there's an even more important number 0: Always assume good faith. When discussing through digital mediums, it's very easy to