Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
> "Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Feb 24, 2005, at 3:51 PM, Drew Davidson wrote: [...] > There has been some very dramatic evolution (to stick with the genetics > analogy here) of Ant in the past couple of years. There were uphill > battles that were fought to achieve those, but they are in and change the > nature of how you write build files now. True. Alas, as Drew and I (among others) have been saying to you (and others, including JDD) that Ant's fundamental approaches have fundamental errors. To get back to the sub-thread that started this, Ant has a bunch of bad "languages". The Ant folks have a serious, harsh reaction to that fact and the statement thereof. > The thing that bothers me in how you and John both portray the situation > as "they". Them or us. Us is them, folks. You have to stick around to > make changes. Dropping in to an e-mail list and firing off some > complaints or even constructive advice and then disappearing in the face > of adversity destines you to be ignored. If you feel strongly about > change in a particular project, then stand up for it. If you feel > strongly about change in your community, whatever that may be, then stand > up for it. No, we don't have to join up. That's called freedom. You are free to take on what you want, sacrifice for it, etc. to hopefully make it better (in your eyes if nobody elses). As opposed to Drew, I don't use Ant or any other Apache based software unless directed to by an employer because the quality generally sucks (with the caveat that 80% of everything sucks :-). As I noted in Anatomy of Insanity, the quality of the software embodies the quality of the organization behind it. As a final note on this specific point, given your background and interest in e.g., things eastern, let me point out two examples that are relevant: the Zen tea ceremony and the Buddha's walking away. I am taking a stand and e.g, calling the ASF to task for their popularity-driven stewardship rather than caring about e.g., quality. Note carefully your emotional reaction to this and, I must say, it's much better than would come from other people who as tied to Apache projects as your are. Clearly, I'm not the only person saying this as other people have set up their own clones of the ASF, competing groups, as well as going back to individual projects (i.e., not under an umbrella organization). Finally, to be clear, in looking at the complete landscape of the software ecology, I love the fact that there's increasing diversity across the spectrum (with the sole, but very disturbing, exception of the truly public domain). In evolutionary terms, we're in a period of rapid speciation and co-evolution with increasing sophistication of the ecology itself. That rocks. But, then again, I'm an optimist. Take care, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
> "Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Feb 24, 2005, at 1:33 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: [...] >>> I don't recall any example you (or Drew, I assume) have provided as an >>> "evil" example of open-source. You've both given me an earful about >>> how Ant sucks, but I haven't heard it as classified as evil. >> Sure it is. Ant's very popularity strongly inhibits the creation of >> anything that's actually good. > Ah, so popular simply cannot be good? Interesting. It's possible to be both popular and good but it's *extremely* rare. Starting off with popular as the primary motivation and then trying to get good has never worked. The dynamics setup when popularity is the main driving force make it almost impossible to make something truly good. Of course, for many people and many uses, it's good enough. [...] >> We all only have so much time and energy to use in our lives and trying >> to deal with all of the pettiness (at best :-) is totally not worth it. > Life is full of pettiness. You're free to shirk it all off and go > against the grain, but often the way to change things is to be an > integral part of them and speak your mind and push in the directions you > feel it should go. > What about politics? Family interactions? Any group of more than one > person requires a bit of diplomacy, compromise, and letting go. Do you > agree? Or do you only do things that have no degree of "pettiness" to > them? My job isn't to play nursemaid to a bunch of spoiled brats or therapist to a bunch of egomaniacs. Your argument here seems to be getting caught up in notion of petty pettiness as opposed to the insulting, indignant, self-indulgent, ad hominem, psuedo-rationalized emotional vomit that flows through so many of the popular F/OSS projects. BTDT. Take care, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
John D. Mitchell wrote: "Andrew" == Andrew Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Really? You work in a place where it's *not* dictated that you use them (or, contrapositively, you e.g., "can't afford" e.g., good solutions)? Or do you only use them on your own pet projects but not at work? Or what? i have used alternatives to each of those projects at work. (jrun, IIS, some POS custom servlets-based framework, make, BLOAT, and others) On pet projects, well, free is good. but there are a lot of free alternatives these days, and free vs. non-free is not the subject of my post. lack of lockin was the subject of this part of my post. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
i'm saying, comparing communities of projects to genes is interesting and provides some insight into why the injection of (varying numbers of) new projects of varying quality into a community is necessary and useful. I explicitly do not judge the quality of any project and indicate that the quality of a project changes over time as a result of environmental changes, changes within the project, or other reasons. I also do not argue that individual projects evolve, just that groups of projects (communities) evolve by the addition of new projects and the increased or decreased popularity of existing projects. I'm also saying that, while interesting, this analogy may be BS. certainly i didn't spend more than 5 minutes analyzing it before writing my original email. feel free to tell me why it's BS. that evolution may occur inside a project or that evolution is a necessary aspect of every open source project are premises that i'll leave it to you to argue. Randolph Kahle wrote: [...] There are all kinds of problems with this analogy. It assumes that the quality of a project is unknowable at the outset so mutations are in fact random. This might actually be reasonable. Groovy apparently looked for quite a while like a good project and has recently started sucking. bcel started out looking very cool, but kind of died for a while (though it might be back again). considering the many non-technical reasons an open source project may fail, judging project quality at any point in its evolution seems tricky enough to make randomness reasonable. I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you arguing for or against an evolutionary analogy? From your description of these open-source projects (and the general context of this thread) it sounds like they are mostly ego trips. Someone thought of an idea that might be "cool", didn't take the time to think deeply about the subject area, started coding, hyped the project ... I have to ask: why does an open-source project take an evolutionary path as you describe? To me that indicates the project had unclear goals, confused objectives, insufficient research and/or knowledge applied to it. Randy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
On Feb 24, 2005, at 3:51 PM, Drew Davidson wrote: I have been "invited" to join the Ant work by you and you alone. My posts to the Ant lists went either (a) ignored or (b) blown off in a condescending way. In neither case did I think that my help was going to be appreciated or wanted. I have critiqued the design of Ant in the past (both publicly and privately) and the problems that are part of Ant are not going away short of starting over. The retardation is genetic and not curable without killing the organism. But I didn't post this to bash Ant (I use it every day and it works for the basic tasks that I need it to do - it's just not gotten over that hump to the point where I can write a real build system in it). My point here is that the Ant community has a "view" on the way that Ant should be and no one will change their minds; they will either (a) ignore or (b) blow off in a condescending way anyone who dares to question the "design" of Ant. I'd rather not fight uphill that way. Plus, it's their project and if I don't want to use it then I won't; or I will use it and just stop pissing into the wind trying to change things with the way it's developed. There has been some very dramatic evolution (to stick with the genetics analogy here) of Ant in the past couple of years. There were uphill battles that were fought to achieve those, but they are in and change the nature of how you write build files now. The thing that bothers me in how you and John both portray the situation as "they". Them or us. Us is them, folks. You have to stick around to make changes. Dropping in to an e-mail list and firing off some complaints or even constructive advice and then disappearing in the face of adversity destines you to be ignored. If you feel strongly about change in a particular project, then stand up for it. If you feel strongly about change in your community, whatever that may be, then stand up for it. Erik, this is something that is a continuing theme with you and OSS: contribute to the project or shut up about it. I suppose that this is a reasonable, though not entirely accurate, summary. It's not quite accurate (about me) in that I welcome opinions and input. I went out of my way to solicit input from you and John about Ant before I wrote the first sentence in the Ant book. And I very much valued both of your contrary opinions about Ant. And I still do. The main point I make here is not to shut up about it, but rather face the realistic situation here. You may get lucky in that your opinions/complaints are heard and someone takes them to heart and does something with it seeing the light that you have provided. But far more realistically is that unless you actually do something about, you're complaining to yourself. This phenomenon is not because the people developing Ant don't want it to be better or that they do not see flaws, its that they are doing the best they can with what they've got and aren't nearly as smart as you to make the brilliant changes that you come up with. And "they" all have real jobs and real families too. There are no Ant developers that I know of that are making their living strictly off Ant. And I can tell you most definitely that book royalties don't even pay to send my kids to school. Tapestry is a different story, though. It is run by someone who is attempting to make his living off of it, and has done a reasonably good job of getting it to that point where its possible. First of all I don't have to contribute to something to have an opinion or not. I can be critical of anything, but this in no way obligates me to improve it. I completely agree with this sentiment... though see above. Secondly, my contribution may not help. Any project has people who are "leaders". If those leaders don't have a vision for the acme of the project (i.e. what's the ultimate version of this product?) then it is doomed to be a dumping ground for commit whores and those without a firm grasp of the totality of where the project should go, leaving an unorganized and ambiguous mess. This changes the dynamic of our conversation. The best projects are run by a benevolent dictator, it seems. The creator of the project who keeps things focused and reviews design decisions with the totality in mind. I concur with that completely. Ant was written like that, but the creator of it ditched out instead of fighting to keep control. Tapestry and Lucene are both driven each by a single brilliant person, warts and all. Leaving stuff out is just as important as putting stuff in (probably more so). If I jumped into Ant or Tapestry with both feet I probably would not be as big a help as I would like to be because I wouldn't be doing the architecture work that would be my most significant use. You would be a huge help to Tapestry, that I can say for certain. For Ant, you'd be a trouble maker! :) The bottom line is that
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
Erik Hatcher wrote: On Feb 24, 2005, at 1:33 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: [lots of stuff deleted, thankfully] Also, since you seem to not see it, the very process that the ASF uses (strong personalities + popularity) is a huge barrier to entry of people who could actually help make things significantly better (such as Drew :-). Drew has as strong a personality as anyone I know. He has been invited on more than one occasion to affect Ant and Tapestry. Drew chooses not to - that is the only barrier to his entry. It is true, though, that the ASF has a barrier to entry - it requires learning the way a project works and how the ASF works currently to be able to effectively jump in. ASF is not static - it is what people make of it. It is a meritocracy. Nothing happens unless someone makes it happen. Changes can be made and many have been made at the highest levels of it. I have to jump in since I'm being used as the rope in your tug-of-war here :-) I have been "invited" to join the Ant work by you and you alone. My posts to the Ant lists went either (a) ignored or (b) blown off in a condescending way. In neither case did I think that my help was going to be appreciated or wanted. I have critiqued the design of Ant in the past (both publicly and privately) and the problems that are part of Ant are not going away short of starting over. The retardation is genetic and not curable without killing the organism. But I didn't post this to bash Ant (I use it every day and it works for the basic tasks that I need it to do - it's just not gotten over that hump to the point where I can write a real build system in it). My point here is that the Ant community has a "view" on the way that Ant should be and no one will change their minds; they will either (a) ignore or (b) blow off in a condescending way anyone who dares to question the "design" of Ant. I'd rather not fight uphill that way. Plus, it's their project and if I don't want to use it then I won't; or I will use it and just stop pissing into the wind trying to change things with the way it's developed. The Tapestry side of things, however, have been more active. I've not participated in the mailing lists too much except for the occasional post. I have, however, been talking with Howard about what is going on with Tapestry and letting him know what works for me and doesn't (we talked LOTS over the past 6 months while I was doing a Tapestry project). Lots of times this includes pointed commentary about why things are the way they are and ways that I think would work better. I'm not saying I've had too much of an effect on the next upcoming version of Tapestry, but I think my voice has been heard by the one person who matters in the Tapestry world (Jakarta or not, community or not, Howard is still Benevolent Overlord of Tapestry). My final point is a bit ad-hominem, but I hope you don't take offense because I see this attitude other places in OSS and I want to comment on it. Since I'm an OSS developer and give my stuff away for free I think that I have a right to comment on this behaviour and attitude and I hope you understand why this bothers me. Erik, this is something that is a continuing theme with you and OSS: contribute to the project or shut up about it. Well, this makes no sense on two levels. First of all I don't have to contribute to something to have an opinion or not. I can be critical of anything, but this in no way obligates me to improve it. That's not my job; that's the job of the people who are in charge of it. I don't ever, ever say anything like this to people who are critical of OGNL. I try to use my position as High Lord of OGNL to fit people's suggestions into the overall project; I don't ask people to contribute or tell them that unless they contribute they may not have an opinion. Secondly, my contribution may not help. Any project has people who are "leaders". If those leaders don't have a vision for the acme of the project (i.e. what's the ultimate version of this product?) then it is doomed to be a dumping ground for commit whores and those without a firm grasp of the totality of where the project should go, leaving an unorganized and ambiguous mess. Leaving stuff out is just as important as putting stuff in (probably more so). If I jumped into Ant or Tapestry with both feet I probably would not be as big a help as I would like to be because I wouldn't be doing the architecture work that would be my most significant use. The bottom line is that I only have so much time on my hands per day and I don't feel that I need to have to pay (with my time) to have my opinions matter because I'm not a committer on a particular project. - Drew -- +-+ < Drew Davidson | OGNL Technology > +-+ | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / |Web: http://www.ognl.org / |Vox: (520) 531-1966 < |
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Tasklist/Calendar
Sigh, I have not used Outlook in a while, as I am now regularly moving between three OS's, But if I recall correctly it was either a Franklin Covey or a David Allen - Getting Things Done plugin With regard to sub tasks, I would think you could use a XML formatted file for the records and then use DOM parser and drop them into objects for presentation. But and if I do not include a calendar I could crank this out in 20-30hrs (mostly because I don't know what others are doing) but If I had a spare 20-30hrs, I would not need to have better time management ;) Hmmm Anyone want to toss in some ideas? I may integrate this sort of thing into an event management project that is being developed with PLUG's Open Source Development group. On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Tim Colson (tcolson) wrote: > Sunbird client and an ApacheServer running webDAV to store the info > might work. > > http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/screenshot.html > http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/images/Calendar_Modern_Day.png > > RE: tasks with subtasks, it's a great feature, but you're SOL. > * Jira 3.x has sub-tasks and an RPC Services API that could be > leveraged. > * CodeJedi.com has "ShadowPlan" with PDA sync. > > Say -- which plugin to Outlook have you seen that does the sub-task > thing? > > Tim > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 12:26 PM > > To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org > > Subject: [jug-discussion] Java Tasklist/Calendar > > > > I need a task and calendaring program that: > > 1) Will synch to a central file (preferably via ssh to > > my server, but > > if I have to manually copy a few files up and down it is OK > > as I can just > > write a script to get the latest copy on machine start up and > > upload changes > > on shut down) > > 2) Can be run on windows (without admin privileges is > > preferable, but > > I > > can live without) > > 3) Can be run on OS X > > 4) Can be run on other *nix's > > 5) The task list needs to be tiered, such that I can put down > > something like Arrange RSS Conference and then underneath it > > put subtasks > > like, Arrange Location, Arrange Speakers, Arrange Venders, > > etc. And under > > those put tasks like Arrange Location -> UAC Conference Room, > > TCC Auditorium, > > etc. > > > > I have seen pluggins for outlook that do this, but I need > > something a bit more > > portable. Any suggestions, keeping in mind I am a poor > > starving college > > student? > > > > I am more then willing to dump everything I have now and > > start with a new > > system if it meets the requirements above. Heck if I can get > > a task list that > > does reminders I can dump the calendaring requirement as well. > > > > Any suggestions would be most appreciative > > > > (Yes, I have thought about just programming one in JAVA > > myself, but I hardly > > have the time) > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] Java Tasklist/Calendar
Sunbird client and an ApacheServer running webDAV to store the info might work. http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/screenshot.html http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/images/Calendar_Modern_Day.png RE: tasks with subtasks, it's a great feature, but you're SOL. * Jira 3.x has sub-tasks and an RPC Services API that could be leveraged. * CodeJedi.com has "ShadowPlan" with PDA sync. Say -- which plugin to Outlook have you seen that does the sub-task thing? Tim > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 12:26 PM > To: jug-discussion@tucson-jug.org > Subject: [jug-discussion] Java Tasklist/Calendar > > I need a task and calendaring program that: > 1) Will synch to a central file (preferably via ssh to > my server, but > if I have to manually copy a few files up and down it is OK > as I can just > write a script to get the latest copy on machine start up and > upload changes > on shut down) > 2) Can be run on windows (without admin privileges is > preferable, but > I > can live without) > 3) Can be run on OS X > 4) Can be run on other *nix's > 5) The task list needs to be tiered, such that I can put down > something like Arrange RSS Conference and then underneath it > put subtasks > like, Arrange Location, Arrange Speakers, Arrange Venders, > etc. And under > those put tasks like Arrange Location -> UAC Conference Room, > TCC Auditorium, > etc. > > I have seen pluggins for outlook that do this, but I need > something a bit more > portable. Any suggestions, keeping in mind I am a poor > starving college > student? > > I am more then willing to dump everything I have now and > start with a new > system if it meets the requirements above. Heck if I can get > a task list that > does reminders I can dump the calendaring requirement as well. > > Any suggestions would be most appreciative > > (Yes, I have thought about just programming one in JAVA > myself, but I hardly > have the time) > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[jug-discussion] Java Tasklist/Calendar
I need a task and calendaring program that: 1) Will synch to a central file (preferably via ssh to my server, but if I have to manually copy a few files up and down it is OK as I can just write a script to get the latest copy on machine start up and upload changes on shut down) 2) Can be run on windows (without admin privileges is preferable, but I can live without) 3) Can be run on OS X 4) Can be run on other *nix's 5) The task list needs to be tiered, such that I can put down something like Arrange RSS Conference and then underneath it put subtasks like, Arrange Location, Arrange Speakers, Arrange Venders, etc. And under those put tasks like Arrange Location -> UAC Conference Room, TCC Auditorium, etc. I have seen pluggins for outlook that do this, but I need something a bit more portable. Any suggestions, keeping in mind I am a poor starving college student? I am more then willing to dump everything I have now and start with a new system if it meets the requirements above. Heck if I can get a task list that does reminders I can dump the calendaring requirement as well. Any suggestions would be most appreciative (Yes, I have thought about just programming one in JAVA myself, but I hardly have the time) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
> Timo wrote: [...] > Heh heh. Non-fatal mutations can cripple an organism, lessening their > chances for survival, and lowering the chances for reproduction (which > is true failure)... or the mutation might create a unique characteristic > change which heightens the organisms survival rate and ability to > reproduce...which if you haven't caught onto the genetics of it all...is > a Good Thing(tm). ;-) > Summary -- unless they are "lethal" -- meaning the offspring dies before > birth, mutations aren't always a Bad Thing(tm). Ah, this is a good illustration of why most of the focus on e.g., genetics is so flawed... Most of the thinking is around the propagation of the individual. However, nature works in terms of the whole. Have fun, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
On Feb 24, 2005, at 1:33 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: And a lot of bad "mouthing" :) Indeed. Alas, you're one of the rare ones who are both tough enough to deal with that crap and still be a nice guy. And you missed my humorous poke at you on that one :) I don't recall any example you (or Drew, I assume) have provided as an "evil" example of open-source. You've both given me an earful about how Ant sucks, but I haven't heard it as classified as evil. Sure it is. Ant's very popularity strongly inhibits the creation of anything that's actually good. Ah, so popular simply cannot be good? Interesting. Also, since you seem to not see it, the very process that the ASF uses (strong personalities + popularity) is a huge barrier to entry of people who could actually help make things significantly better (such as Drew :-). Drew has as strong a personality as anyone I know. He has been invited on more than one occasion to affect Ant and Tapestry. Drew chooses not to - that is the only barrier to his entry. It is true, though, that the ASF has a barrier to entry - it requires learning the way a project works and how the ASF works currently to be able to effectively jump in. ASF is not static - it is what people make of it. It is a meritocracy. Nothing happens unless someone makes it happen. Changes can be made and many have been made at the highest levels of it. We all only have so much time and energy to use in our lives and trying to deal with all of the pettiness (at best :-) is totally not worth it. Life is full of pettiness. You're free to shirk it all off and go against the grain, but often the way to change things is to be an integral part of them and speak your mind and push in the directions you feel it should go. What about politics? Family interactions? Any group of more than one person requires a bit of diplomacy, compromise, and letting go. Do you agree? Or do you only do things that have no degree of "pettiness" to them? Erik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
> "Andrew" == Andrew Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > tomcat,apache httpd, tapestry, struts, ant, and bcel have all made my job > or my hobby easier at one time or another. i'm sure other apache.org > projects have made other people's work easier. i care oh so very little > about whether these or other projects are evil or disfunctional. Cool. > no one forces me to use any of them. Really? You work in a place where it's *not* dictated that you use them (or, contrapositively, you e.g., "can't afford" e.g., good solutions)? Or do you only use them on your own pet projects but not at work? Or what? I'm seeing more and more projects relying on more and more F/OSS software being forced based upon the nominal, perceived cost (i.e., zero :-) rather than on the fully-burdened cost. Thanks, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] RE: Bagging on ASF...or not
> "Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Feb 24, 2005, at 1:11 PM, John D. Mitchell writes: [...] >> Naw, I expected the ironic humor to come through (because that's a kind >> of argument that's made all too often on the mailing lists and >> newsgroups). Alas. > So you're now guilty of doing exactly that which you complain about. Now > that is ironic! :) Sigh. No, I did that on purpose. The sad irony is that not only did that not come through the first time but that you also misunderstood the explaination. I despair, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
> "Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Feb 23, 2005, at 1:03 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: >> You're confusing intent with result. The actual results of the ASF is a >> lot of bad software and a lot of bad "communities" around that software. > And a lot of bad "mouthing" :) Indeed. Alas, you're one of the rare ones who are both tough enough to deal with that crap and still be a nice guy. [...] >> Gee, if you didn't intend to kill a room of children but you did choose >> to get behind the week of a tanker truck while impaired and >> "accidentally" ran it into the building, is that evil? > I don't believe in accidents. So, to be clear, that means that you agree that that's evil? Or what? [...] >> Dude. You've been given plenty of examples over the years in our >> conversations (and conversations that you've had with other people, at >> least one of whom is also on this list :-) -- you just don't seem to >> view those as being e.g., evil. > I don't recall any example you (or Drew, I assume) have provided as an > "evil" example of open-source. You've both given me an earful about how > Ant sucks, but I haven't heard it as classified as evil. Sure it is. Ant's very popularity strongly inhibits the creation of anything that's actually good. Seriously, check out my blog on "Anatomy of Insanity?" on Artima. The myopic focus leads to a lot of problems that, alas, almost nobody on the inside can see but is obvious to those on the outside. That specific example is with Microsoft but Sun doesn't the exact same thing (but in their own, uniquely screwed up way :-). Also, since you seem to not see it, the very process that the ASF uses (strong personalities + popularity) is a huge barrier to entry of people who could actually help make things significantly better (such as Drew :-). We all only have so much time and energy to use in our lives and trying to deal with all of the pettiness (at best :-) is totally not worth it. This is a variant of the old saw "power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely"... The popularity+power politics attracts a lot of people and their pet projects which are e.g., egomaniacs (regardless of how good/bad they may be at hiding it behind complicated rationalizations). [...] >> The justification that "we must be good because we're giving our >> software away for free" regardless of the quality of the community or >> software is self-righteously self-serving. > I've never heard that from anyone I know at ASF, either explicitly or > implicitly. I hope that the real underlying theme is "think globally, > act locally". Fish, water. :-) [...] > The ASF is making it up as it goes. If others follow thinking we're > making the "standard" then they are misled. They should learn from the > trials and tribulations. New ground is being broken - follow behind "us" > and you might fall in the same hole we do. So, who's fault is it that > bad practices are happening outside the ASF? Wanna blame the ASF on > that? Looking for a scapegoat it seems to me. Nope. I could care less about the ASF. It was just an example. We can pick on nearly any organization be it F/OSS or commercial. To be clear, the reason that the Apache group is such a target is that they are often help up as an exemplar of the "best" of the F/OSS community and therefore they have been given a lot of power as e.g., a role model. Some other posters in this thread have brought up the notion of genetics. As noted, it's a bit of a hard analogy to get too work well. I prefer the notion of ecology. There's a relatively diverse number of biomes relating to software and there's a fairly complex set of ecologies therein. It's utterly fascinating to me how the biomes are merging and so the ecologies are also being forced into new equilibria. Take care, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] RE: Bagging on ASF...or not
On Feb 24, 2005, at 1:11 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: "Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:48 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: [...] But sure, I'll concede that yours really is bigger than mine if you want to play that game :) Funny how you've managed to turn it around into some kind of chest thumping thing. Naw, I expected the ironic humor to come through (because that's a kind of argument that's made all too often on the mailing lists and newsgroups). Alas. So you're now guilty of doing exactly that which you complain about. Now that is ironic! :) Even more ironic is that you brought this thread back to life with a reply of mine that was sent to you privately (yes, I did agree that it was acceptable to bring it back to the list), and brought it to a "community" list specific to a community that neither of us actually reside. I suppose the hard-core sociologists would have a field day with the irony of it all. Erik Mea culpa, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] RE: Bagging on ASF...or not
> "Erik" == Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:48 PM, John D. Mitchell wrote: [...] > But sure, I'll concede that yours really is bigger than mine if you want > to play that game :) Funny how you've managed to turn it around into some > kind of chest thumping thing. Naw, I expected the ironic humor to come through (because that's a kind of argument that's made all too often on the mailing lists and newsgroups). Alas. Mea culpa, John - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
> There is a lot of room for non-fatal mutations > (like Tomcat, > >Jetspeed, ...and Drew ) to survive and even procreate. Heck, I > >hear Drew has a reay cute kid that looks nothing like him. > > > > > This is the second thread that I've been forceable dragged > into :-) And > now Tim is making inflamatory remarks about both my genetics and my > progeny. Is this flame bait, Timo? :-) Heh heh. Non-fatal mutations can cripple an organism, lessening their chances for survival, and lowering the chances for reproduction (which is true failure)... or the mutation might create a unique characteristic change which heightens the organisms survival rate and ability to reproduce...which if you haven't caught onto the genetics of it all...is a Good Thing(tm). ;-) Summary -- unless they are "lethal" -- meaning the offspring dies before birth, mutations aren't always a Bad Thing(tm). (...but Jetspeed still really does suck. ) Cheers, Timo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
Tim Colson (tcolson) wrote: [some stuff deleted] As Andy pointed out... maybe Codehaus.org will kill Apache.org... or maybe not. There is a lot of room for non-fatal mutations (like Tomcat, Jetspeed, ...and Drew ) to survive and even procreate. Heck, I hear Drew has a reay cute kid that looks nothing like him. This is the second thread that I've been forceable dragged into :-) And now Tim is making inflamatory remarks about both my genetics and my progeny. Is this flame bait, Timo? :-) - Drew -- +-+ < Drew Davidson | OGNL Technology > +-+ | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / |Web: http://www.ognl.org / |Vox: (520) 531-1966 < |Fax: (520) 531-1965\ | Mobile: (520) 405-2967 \ +-+ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [jug-discussion] the languages that we create....
[...] There are all kinds of problems with this analogy. It assumes that the quality of a project is unknowable at the outset so mutations are in fact random. This might actually be reasonable. Groovy apparently looked for quite a while like a good project and has recently started sucking. bcel started out looking very cool, but kind of died for a while (though it might be back again). considering the many non-technical reasons an open source project may fail, judging project quality at any point in its evolution seems tricky enough to make randomness reasonable. I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you arguing for or against an evolutionary analogy? From your description of these open-source projects (and the general context of this thread) it sounds like they are mostly ego trips. Someone thought of an idea that might be "cool", didn't take the time to think deeply about the subject area, started coding, hyped the project ... I have to ask: why does an open-source project take an evolutionary path as you describe? To me that indicates the project had unclear goals, confused objectives, insufficient research and/or knowledge applied to it. Randy smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
