Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mikhail Kryshen]

Alex Sassmannshausen  writes:

> Hi Mikhail,
>
> Mikhail Kryshen  writes:
>
>> Andy,
>>
>> If you've long had issues with RMS, then why do you still want to be
>> with GNU?  You don't have to participate in GNU to be part of the free
>> software movement.  Is it that you see GNU as an important platform for
>> your political activism?  Is it about donations?  Identity?  Pride?
>> What is it so significant that it made you stoop to harassment and
>> defamation?  Or could it be that you act purely on emotion under
>> influence of the widespread moral panic?
>
> Andy is doing what he believes is right, like so many other people in
> this debate.  Let's focus on finding a way to maintain the amazing
> community around Guile and Guix, and to carry forward the spirit of GNU.
>
> Please don't impugn the character of others on this mailing list.

Sorry for that.  I admit, I got angry.  But I still have a point, so
let me distill it to the bare minimum of the following two
propositions:

1. Defamation is morally wrong and socially unacceptable.
2. A group of GNU maintainers participated in defamation or at least
   endorsed it.

Andy's message contains defamatory allegations.  The "joint statement"
(which is still present on guix.gnu.org) is vague, but its timing
implies strong relation to the recent defamatory media campaign, and the
signatories neither explained why they decided to do it now, nor
acknowledged it as a mistake.

Thus, I believe that the group of maintainers did a serious misconduct
which undermines trust in them and discredits the community.

And this has nothing to do with personality of RMS or his role in GNU.
Believing that RMS is bad for GNU is not an excuse for such actions.

--
Mikhail


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 11:29:35AM +, Todor Kondić wrote:
> You know, there is a big IT department within our institution and telling 
> them I will base some serious work on technologies such as GNU  Guile and 
> Guix did raise a few eyebrows (those not raised are probably the cause of 
> their proprietors not being informed enough).
> 
> […]
> Couple of notes:
> 
> 1) Are there any ladies on these lists? I am *dying* to hear from them
> 2) Related to (1) ... a brief look at the maintainers who signed the Joined 
> Statement gives an impression that it leans heavily to the politically 
> Western hemisphere; just a comment, maybe food for thought
> 3) The RMS scandal was brought to my attention by a female coder colleague 
> who previously knew nothing of RMS's, or FSF's or GNU's work in the "Open 
> Source Community"; another nibble for thought
>


There have been few contributions from women,
e.g. 
(I do not know what its status is), but I believe bringing GNU Guile
to professional use could help diversify.  Thank you for that!

Regards,
Florian

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Mark,

Mark H Weaver  skribis:

> RMS has not yet appointed me as a co-maintainer.  To my knowledge, the
> only thing he has done so far is to *ask* me if I wanted to be appointed
> co-maintainer.  I answered "yes", but I've not yet received any further
> messages from him on this topic.  I also note that I'm not listed as a
> maintainer in the official list of maintainers.

Thanks for clarifying, Mark.  In the current context, I, like others
here, find this action of RMS very problematic.  Far from helping
deescalate tensions, it has evidently poured oil onto the fire and moved
the conflict to Guile, which until now was a safe harbor far away from
the private GNU mailing lists.

It has also complicated our relation, though I’m happy the discussion
we’re having is helping avoid misunderstandings and misconceptions.

Ludo’.

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Thompson, David]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 9:33 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber
 wrote:
>
> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
> > [resending with fixed headers, for proper threading]
> >
> > Hi Christopher,
> >
> > Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
> >> I think *RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without
> >> notifying or asking the other maintainers
> >
> > Did you not see my recent correction about this?  I CC'd you,
> > but maybe something went wrong.  Please see:
> >
> >   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00031.html
> >
> > I'll respond to the rest of your post in a future message.
>
> Oh, I didn't see it... my mistake.  (I am in extreme email backlog mode,
> but that's no excuse: I should have read the rest of the thread before
> posting.)
>
> I appreciate you clarifying this and do find that dramatically less
> jarring than if there was a unilateral appointment.

Yes, this is less worrisome.  All I wish is that the maintainer team
be built on mutual respect and cooperation rather than the divine
appointments of a dictator.  I hope everyone can come to an agreement.

- Dave

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Christopher Lemmer Webber]

Mark H Weaver writes:

> [resending with fixed headers, for proper threading]
>
> Hi Christopher,
>
> Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
>> I think *RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without
>> notifying or asking the other maintainers
>
> Did you not see my recent correction about this?  I CC'd you,
> but maybe something went wrong.  Please see:
>
>   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00031.html
>
> I'll respond to the rest of your post in a future message.

Oh, I didn't see it... my mistake.  (I am in extreme email backlog mode,
but that's no excuse: I should have read the rest of the thread before
posting.)

I appreciate you clarifying this and do find that dramatically less
jarring than if there was a unilateral appointment.

 - Chris

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Christopher,

Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
> I think *RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without
> notifying or asking the other maintainers

Did you not see my recent correction about this?  I CC'd you,
but maybe something went wrong.  Please see:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2019-10/msg00031.html

I'll respond to the rest of your post in a future message.

Regards,
  Mark

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Christopher Lemmer Webber]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:

> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> Andy Wingo  writes:
>>> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
>>> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
>>> to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions and
>>> shipped them in the 2.9.4 release;
>>
>> The funny thing is, I don't actually have a strong opinion on this
>> particular change.
>>
>> What I *do* have a strong opinion on is that you made the decision
>> unilaterally, without discussion on the mailing list
>
> I have been worrying a bit about this change because I do not see how to
> implement it in Mes.  I did not speak up because I believe that our
> bootstrapping efforts should not hold Guile development back.
>
>> Ludovic and I only found out about the change after the public
>> announcements had already been made.
>>
>> Can you understand why I consider this behavior to be dictatorial?
>
> Yes, I can see that now.  However, having met Andy I could not have
> imagined that something like that could have been his motivation.  It
> would be great if we all could spend some time together.
>
>> For what it's worth, despite our disagreements, I still sincerely
>> believe that you are acting in good faith, and fighting for what you
>> believe is right.  I hope that you can believe that I'm doing the same.
>
> When you left that was pretty discouraging for me: I enjoyed and much
> appreciated your recent help with the Guix bootstrap.  Thank you for
> that!  I am happy you have decided to come back.

Mark played a major role in me learning and being welcomed into both the
Guile and Guix communities so I also felt sad to see him go (especially
in Guix, where I've followed his contributions more closely than in
Guile itself).  I will also say: I don't want to see the Guile/Guix
community shaken apart.  IMO Guile and Guix have been the most positive
communities in GNU in my experience over the last 5 years; I'd like to
see it remain that way.

That said, I think there are two things that are being mixed up in here
simultaneously, and it's making the situation more confusing.  There's
the technical decision-making that Mark is upset by which, I will take
it at face value that this is why Mark wanted to come back as
co-maintainer.  There also is what appears to be what appears to be
retaliation for Andy being one of the people speaking up (I am also one,
but Andy has been more visible given his blogpost) about the governance
problems in GNU and RMS's role in them.

Again, even if Mark's concerns were more about the former issue (the
technical decisionmaking of the project, which it turns out is also a
balancing governance vs who-is-doing-the-work discussion), I think
*RMS's* action of unilaterally re-appointing Mark without notifying or
asking the other maintainers lead to the "could the rug be pulled out
from me at any time?" response many GNU developers/maintainers
(including myself) read into it.  Even if that's what Mark's concern was
(I never saw the internal GNU discussion lists), that definitely created
confusion.

Now to return to the issue of technical decisionmaking in Guile.  For
better or for worse, I think it's true that Andy is the main person
applying hack energy to the Guile codebase.  Mark, I understand your
concern that Andy hasn't communicated clearly the changes he was making
beforehand, and maybe we can improve things there.  Is there a way we
can do that without also applying "stop energy" to that work at large?
I am worried also that language such as calling someone a dictator of
Guile isn't a constructive way to go about it.

 - Chris

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Alex Sassmannshausen]

Hello,

pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)  writes:

> This is very sad.  I appreciate the enormous time investments of all
> of you for Guile.  When you make a decision, I hope you understand the
> other.
>
> Regards,
> Florian

Many incredibly thoughtful emails have been sent to the mailing list on
this subject, and I will struggle to communicate ideas any more clearly
than has been done so far.

I have enormous respect for the work that RMS carried to bring Free
Software, and indeed GNU, into the world.  It is possible to recognise
the great deeds of a person whilst realising they are flawed, like the
rest of us; or that they have also done less than desirable things.

It is possible to believe RMS has done great work, and to believe that
maybe he is not the right person to lead the FSF or GNU.  If you start a
movement, you must realise that at some point you might find yourself no
longer the leader of it.

I believe that if different people, over a long period of time, keep
expressing similar worries about a person, then we need to listen to
those people.

But all the above points are really only tangentially related to the
present conversation.  Here, we are concerned with the wonderful
community that exists right now around Guile and Guix.  And I want this
community to continue to exist, and grow and retain its momentum.

We are all responsible for the wonderful community we have here, and the
way that this debate has taken place on these lists, when compared to
others I have seen is testament to this.

As for the disagreements between the past and present maintainers, I
have enormous respect for all of you, and hope you can together come to
an agreement on how to proceed.  I do believe there is sufficient space
in our community for different perspectives.  We should always start
from a commitment to doing what's right and to ensuring our space is
welcoming to people from all walks of life.

Best wishes,

Alex

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Alex Sassmannshausen]

Hi Mikhail,

Mikhail Kryshen  writes:

> Andy,
>
> If you've long had issues with RMS, then why do you still want to be
> with GNU?  You don't have to participate in GNU to be part of the free
> software movement.  Is it that you see GNU as an important platform for
> your political activism?  Is it about donations?  Identity?  Pride?
> What is it so significant that it made you stoop to harassment and
> defamation?  Or could it be that you act purely on emotion under
> influence of the widespread moral panic?

Andy is doing what he believes is right, like so many other people in
this debate.  Let's focus on finding a way to maintain the amazing
community around Guile and Guix, and to carry forward the spirit of GNU.

Please don't impugn the character of others on this mailing list.

Best wishes

Alex

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Mark H Weaver]

Hi Jan,

Jan Nieuwenhuizen  writes:

> Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> Andy Wingo  writes:
>>> Before the RMS/GNU/FSF conversation started, Mark Weaver left Guile, for
>>> essentially unrelated reasons.  He threatened to leave because he wished
>>> to be consulted before I landed mixed definitions and expressions and
>>> shipped them in the 2.9.4 release;
>>
>> The funny thing is, I don't actually have a strong opinion on this
>> particular change.
>>
>> What I *do* have a strong opinion on is that you made the decision
>> unilaterally, without discussion on the mailing list
>
> I have been worrying a bit about this change because I do not see how to
> implement it in Mes.

There's a straightforward way to translate a body containing mixed
definitions and expressions into a 'letrec*'.  It's illustrated in the
commit log, and in the manual:

  
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/commit/?id=20535922147cd5992330962aaa5c4986563fc905
  
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guile.git/tree/doc/ref/api-binding.texi?id=5284b9b9c6cecc404a912acaefce2b883ac0dbba#n284

  Mark

Re: conflicts in the gnu project now affect guile

[Nala Ginrut]

hi Andy, I think Mark has explained something, I hope you can rethink about
it calmly. It seems a misunderstanding.

A decade ago I came to Guile community, and I've learned many things from
the people here. Andy, Mark, and Ludo are the people I really respect.
However, someday if they start to blame each other, what can I do now?
No one can keep a very good relationship after so many years of
cooperation. Obviously, in a cooperation relationship, there're always
compromises and misunderstandings.

I think I can understand why many people dislike RMS. When I become a GNU
maintainer and start the first conversation, I realized RMS is not so easy
to talk.
IIRC, when I first time to contact RMS with mails, at least the first 20
private emails are quarrels. ;-)
However, I still find a way to work with him, because I think his paranoia
is the essential factor to push free software so far.

So if anyone dislikes RMS because of that, I fully understand you and I
don't think you have to endure. You may find your way out.
But I don't think the moral concerns and personal life should affect a
technical community. We're different people from different cultures.
Please let me remind that LGBT was considered immoral previously. Let's be
more diversity.

I gradually realized that people blame RMS recently is not because of his
misinterpreted comments, it's trivial, just an excuse. I think some people
just can't endure RMS, that's the essential reason. I don't know, I'm not
sure any new leader of GNU was elected, whether she/he will be still blamed
like this, after all, no one is perfect.

To my understanding, Guile is very important for GNU operating system. And
we've helped to push it so far till today. Are we doing it wrong?
If Guile quit GNU, then what's its position? IMHO, Guile is on a very good
track these years. If Guile quit GNU, is it competitive enough to other
Scheme implementation?

I'm the kind of pragmatism people. I hope you can think about it carefully.
After all, the decision includes all our efforts for many years.

But anyway, any of you will not lose my respect. Because I don't think
anyone is wrong here, you just try to insist on your faith kindly.

Best regards.



On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 9:08 AM Mark H Weaver  wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I just realized that I made a mistake, and my mistake has caused people
> to strongly condemn RMS for something that he did not actually do.
>
> RMS has not yet appointed me as a co-maintainer.  To my knowledge, the
> only thing he has done so far is to *ask* me if I wanted to be appointed
> co-maintainer.  I answered "yes", but I've not yet received any further
> messages from him on this topic.  I also note that I'm not listed as a
> maintainer in the official list of maintainers.
>
> I misinterpreted RMS's question as an offer, and that was my mistake.
> The fault is mine, and mine alone.  RMS should not be blamed for it.
>
>Mark
>
>
> Andy Wingo  wrote:
> > Still, it was with surprise that I woke up this morning to a request
> > from Mark to re-join the Guile project on Savannah, saying that RMS had
> > appointed Mark to become co-maintainer, and that Mark assented -- "given
> > recent events".
> >
> > Now, Richard has no idea about Guile or how it works either technically
> > or socially, and has not consulted with me as Guile maintainer, nor to
> > my knowledge did he consult with Ludovic.
>
> "Thompson, David"  wrote:
> > But now that I know that the truth is that RMS, as chief nuisance, put
> > Mark back into this role without the consent of either active Guile
> > co-maintainer, and without even telling them, I am extremely
> > disappointed and I do not approve.
>
> Christopher Lemmer Webber  wrote:
> > I'm extremely saddened to see RMS pull this move.  It seriously
> > undermines faith for maintainers of GNU projects that ther is any
> > semblance of fair governance, and that the rug can't be pulled out from
> > under their feet at any time.
>
>