On Monday 03 April 2006 19:35, Aron Griffis wrote: > I disagree with fast-tracking this to any official Gentoo > documentation.
i never used the word "fast" ... where did it come from ? maybe from the sweet behind of yours ? (you're going to be at LWE this year right ? mmmmmmmmmmmmmm) > > Be considerate. Your work will be used by other people, and you in > > turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision you make will > > affect users and colleagues, and we expect you to take those > > consequences into account when making decisions. > > All of this is obvious, except for who is "we"? the Gentoo community ? your peers and loved ones ? > > Be respectful. The Gentoo community and its members treat one > > another with respect. > > Odd to make this declarative statement when it isn't true. this document now exists because this statement isnt true ... this is one part of a solution imo > > Everyone can make a valuable contribution to Gentoo. > > They can? Making this kind of feel-good blanket statement just > detracts from the rest of this document. how so ? one of the critiques we have is that one jackass can turn off users/potential devs simply by their abrasive behavior. another critique is that some of us (i am guilty of this as well) of being too "snobbish" in terms of who can actually make useful contributions (generally if you have an @gentoo.org, that somehow "qualifies" you while those who do not are just meat). i recognize i'm a bit of a dick and i'm trying to change. > > We may not always agree, but disagreement is no excuse for > > poor behaviour and poor manners. We might all experience some > > frustration now and then, but we cannot allow that frustration to > > turn into a personal attacks. It's important to remember that > > a community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not > > a productive one. > > This should be shortened to say just what it means: Developers will > have more fun, be more productive, and create a better distribution if > we concentrate on the issues instead of resorting to personal attacks. i sort of like the longer winded version better ... really this paragraph shouldnt have to exist at all, but since it does, i like the version that spells out each detail clearly. > > We expect members of the Gentoo community to be > > respectful when dealing with other contributors as well as with > > people outside the Gentoo project, and with users of Gentoo. > > Again, who is "we"? see previous comment > > Be collaborative. Gentoo and Free Software are about collaboration > > and working together. Collaboration reduces redundancy of work done > > in the Free Software world, and improves the quality of the software > > produced. You should aim to collaborate with other Gentoo > > maintainers, as well as with the upstream community that is > > interested in the work you do. Your work should be done > > transparently and patches from Gentoo should be given back to the > > community when they are made, not just when the distribution > > releases. If you wish to work on new code for existing upstream > > projects, at least keep those projects informed of your ideas and > > progress. It may not be possible to get consensus from upstream or > > even from your colleagues about the correct implementation of an > > idea, so don't feel obliged to have that agreement before you begin, > > but at least keep the outside world informed of your work, and > > publish your work in a way that allows outsiders to test, discuss > > and contribute to your efforts. > > This part makes sense, I think... though I don't see the point of > codifying it except to "throw the book" at the next Paludis. Frankly > I think Ciaran did nothing wrong to restrict distribution on a project > he didn't feel was ready for public consumption. It has always seemed > to me like the overreactions were the problem. err, i dont see this interpretation at all ... how would this affect the Paludis work ? in anything, it codifies the work as being even "more" valid really though, this paragraph is not targeted at the Paludis project or Ciaran in any way ... not quite sure where this thought of yours is coming from (somewhere underneath that beautiful hair of yours i imagine) > > When you disagree, consult others. Disagreements, both political and > > technical, happen all the time and the Gentoo community is no > > exception. The important goal is not to avoid disagreements or > > differing views but to resolve them constructively. You should turn > > to the community and to the community process to seek advice and to > > resolve disagreements. We have the Council, Infra, Devrel and Team > > Leaders all of which help you decide the right course for Gentoo. > > What do you mean by "turn to the community and to the community > process"? I'm not sure what that entails. we have a couple "standard" means of opening community discussion. irc, e-mail lists, forums, you name it. > And I'm really not sure I understand what the last sentence means. the idea is to provide some good examples of resources you can query for feedback ... perhaps tweak the sentence a little ? > > Repeated disruptive behaviors will be viewed as a security and > > stability threat to Gentoo. > > Classic switching to the passive voice when the actor wishes to be > distanced from the action. please consider the document without these disciplinary related paragraphs as they belong elsewhere -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
