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 <hans.don...@pobox.com> 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<bottig...@gmail.com> 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 <joe.barnh...@gmail.com> 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 <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> 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 web2py@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
