So far with web2py I have not seen this, and from Massimo's reply it is not the intention to do so. And seeing from this list, neither will the rest.
And regarding contribution in source, Massimo will even block those that come from the 'developers' when they do not meet his criteria for web2py. Perhaps calling this group of people 'developers' is slightly misleading. In stead of looking at the name, look at the intention. On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 23:12, Bottiger<[email protected]> wrote: > > Having been somewhat experienced in the politics of open source, I > cannot say this is the case. > > I have experienced occasions where useful contributions I have spent > significant time working on ignored by the admins because they wanted > to keep the number of contributors low, or they simply did not like > them. > > A public example of this, as many of you may remember is Con Kolivas. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Con_Kolivas > > He vastly improved the scheduler for the Linux kernel, but it was not > committed. Instead, a Linux developer incumbent, Ingo Molnar > reimplemented it and merely delegated Con Kolivas to the footnotes. > > Moving development discussion into web2py-developers, which is by one > person's invite only, seems to be moving towards this direction. > > On Jul 18, 1:44 pm, Hans Donner <[email protected]> wrote: >> Bottiger, >> >> "and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking more difficult" >> >> in fact, it is not: you can still contribute what you want, you can >> still post it here or send it to massimo - please do so. >> Roadmap, or no roadmap; dev group or not. >> >> H >> >> On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 22:21, Bottiger<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I can't shake the feeling that I spurred this move. >> >> > I might be a newcomer to Web2Py, but I have already sunk some time >> > into studying Web2Py such as finding broken links on the main page and >> > benchmarking the bundled version of flup (which should not be used in >> > a production environment because of GIL) compared to the official flup >> > that has prefork. I have had made code contributions to other open- >> > source projects, and I planned to for Web2Py but now it is looking >> > more difficult. >> >> > On Jul 18, 10:34 am, Joe Barnhart <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I am surprised at this division of groups. Web2py does not have so >> >> much traffic that it is a burden to have all messages in one group. >> >> The intent is *precisely* to exclude people from certain >> >> conversations. There really can be no other reason for setting up a >> >> "developers" group with gated write access. The answer to "certain >> >> comments taken out of context" is more and better communication, not >> >> restricted lists of high priests vs. commoners. >> >> >> This strikes me as very heavy-handed and autocratic. This is not a >> >> good sign for our project. You have set the barrier for participation >> >> in web2py very high by this move. Honestly I am very surprised that >> >> anybody (esp. Massimo) thinks this is a good idea. >> >> >> Warm regards, >> >> >> Joe Barnhart >> >> >> On Jul 17, 5:39 pm, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> > One more thing... this is not at all intended to exclude people from >> >> > important conversations. >> >> >> > If you feel one way or another you can still bring it up here. >> >> >> > It is just that sometime some comments may be taken out of context >> >> > from new users and be interpreted in the wrong way. >> >> >> > Let's see how it works out. If you have any suggestion to improve let >> >> > me know. >> >> >> > Massimo > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
