On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 10:58 AM Daniel Dickinson < open...@daniel.thecshore.com> wrote:
> On 16-05-05 11:38 AM, Jonathan Bennett wrote: > > There is plenty of blame to go around, I think. Seems like the Lede > > guys should have had the decency to at least inform the Openwrt > > leadership privately that they were planning this venture. The surprise > > The problem is that LEDE is pretty much who should be considered > "OpenWrt Leadership" IMO as they are the majority of ones doing the > actual work. This isn't like working for some bad corp (I currently > have good managers so it's better than for me even at work) where there > are (supposed to be) execs making the decisions regardless of what those > doing the work think. > > > announcement must have felt very much like a stab in the back. "Et tu, > > brute?" and all that. I think they want a "friendly fork" as much as > > possible, but they dropped the ball in how they announced it. I suspect > > that a private email to mbm and kaloz could have gone a long ways > > towards heading off problems. As has been pointed out, the public > > I think the reason for no private email was either fear of retaliation > or something major had already happened 'behind-the-scenes' that made > that moot. > > I'm not sure their silence is entirely their choice as well (as in I > find the lack of any posts has me wondering if they can post). > > > announcement should not have come from an @openwrt.org > > <http://openwrt.org> email. > > That much I agree with. > > > > > That said, deleting their emails was totally uncalled for. Seems that > > those should be restored, perhaps with the caveat that they are more > > carefully used with regards to Lede, aka, not for publicizing or > > promoting it. > > > > Guys, for the love of the project, the users, and all else that is good, > > please don't make this a ffmpeg/libav split. Openwrt has been an > > amazing thing for a long time, and if mishandled, this has the potential > > to actually kill it. > > > > The changes that the Lede guys are suggesting would be welcome, but > > splitting the project and community with an ugly fork is very much not > > welcome. > > Let's just say that there are strong personalities who haven't been > working well together and that this has been a long time coming; perhaps > if something like using a mediator had been considered before things got > to this point it would have helped. At this point I'm not sure there is a > solution unless both sides are willing to bend a little (I'm really not > sure who has been flexible and who has not, but as I have said I suspect > a large part of the issue is that 'management' (who aren't and don't, > really) has overruled those doing the majority of the work and in an > open source project that doesn't fly). > I don't disagree. I just see the current state of Openwrt/Lede as a mess for the community. > > Regards, > > Daniel > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel >
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
