[Compcomm] Our problems?

[Ketil Wendelbo Aanensen]

On 6/19/07, RYX <ryx at ryxperience.com> wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 19.06.2007, 10:22 +0200 schrieb Ketil Wendelbo
> Aanensen:
> > Can someone, someone in charge, please, please, please:
> >
> > - try to list the things that cause disagreements (I see name,
> > compiz.org/opencompisiting.org, as the first areas to be covered)
> > - list the people on this list who are allowed to vote
> > - and then have a vote?
> OK, I'll just try to some up the major problems I see:
>
> - The merged project suddenly got a much bigger scope than it originally
> should have ("project enhancing compiz and maybe creating other
> compositing apps" VS. "hub for compositing apps, combined forum for
> everything that comes")
>
> - Some people continously prove to be not capable of ensuring a
> professional way of handling things (in technical areas) which likely
> will make a joined project lose its credibility (when compared to
> compiz). Only one example: "one-man-show"-actions whenever certain
> admins get angry about things and start dropping/replacing forums
> without asking the whole team
>
> - Circumstances concerning NOT using the compiz-name for a "possibly
> lightweight-DE-like" project have changed ... it would be ok now, so all
> this (original) naming-issues should be gone anyway. Names like "compiz
> fusion" were originally well accepted by many people, now the "compiz"
> in the name is yet again a problem (btw:95% of end-users say they don't
> care about a name)
>
> - Lack of a clearly structured management (which were proposed several
> times) and clearly separated responsibilities
>
> - Compiz.org was said to be kept/extended (in our original definition of
> what the re-unification should include), now it is apparently to be
> dropped/replaced by some unstable and rushed "alternative" without any
> clear goal, roadmap or identity
>
> - Continous approaches of misinformation among innocent users to create
> a wrong picture of the "other side"
>
> These are only the few ones which immediately come to my mind. This is
> my honest opinion and my main concerns. However - I think this will
> start another flaming by certain persons and I maybe get more "open
> letters" :D ... (Though maybe you should all sum up our problems instead
> of trying to make me the problem ;) ...)

RYX, I sympathize with some of your ideas, but NOT how you often
present them. Like some other people here, you insist on sabotaging
your own ideas by linking them to some worn out conflict and distaste
for other people.
Stapling every view together with: "the fork was stupid, and should
never have happened" is useless. Everyone knows how you feel,
repeating it won't change history. (And that goes for closing
beryl-project.org's forums, using phpBB3, etc. etc. too)

This is biting you in the ass every day, and you should be able to see that..
(Don't get me started on other people, like some lovely oc.org-admins
that locks down "flamewars" that THEY escalated because they can't be
bothered to defend their views in an adult manner. This is not very
self helpful either, anyone that doesn't see that is either a moron, a
5 year old, or both.)

> > There seems to be purely discussions here that have no goals.
> That's why I intentionally asked for everyone's goals.

Not much happened, so I thought I'd try once more. Seems like people
are more interested in rehashing the past than making a clean slate
and plan the future. I'm tempted to say that I'm really, really happy
that no software developers runs a country. There's programming, and
there's planning a community, making you good at one is NO guarantee
that you are even sub-par at the other.

> > You will
> > never be able to convince all of the others, so why not make a vote
> > for it instead?
> Who do you think should vote on that? Should we simple give away the
> responsibility because we are not able to handle it like adults? That
> would be like the captain(s) leaving a sinking ship and leaving the
> passengers in decision about what to do.

I think the people who actually have done real work on the project
should vote. Not the community, so not me either.

"Giving it away" != "making a decision based on a developer's
democracy". It's actually quite the opposite. Democracy and compromise
IS handling it like adults.

I said that one from each "camp" should decide, and maybe one more
impartial person too. That would involve those people deciding who
votes and who doesn't, not making the decisions (a small team of
developer heads SHOULD exist, but... snowball... a warm place... Don't
you all see that so many big FOSS projects has very heated flamewars,
but still manage to run a course because someone is there making
decisions?)

> > There can't be a valid argument that hasn't had all points of view
> > covered already. We're now down to the charming. "It won't happen! Let
> > it go" as if we're all high school kids deciding what to do for lunch
> > break.
> That's true.

And that includes you too sometimes, my friend.

> > Quinn and Mike, or whatever, couldn't you agree resolve these three
> > points? (1 from each "camp") should be able to sort this out.
> I am unsure if those two would want to do anything together, but it
> could be seen as an important sign of peace ...

Yes. If the most involved developers would actually sit down and make
an agreement, that would maybe get things really rolling here. In my
naïve spirit (although I'm almost twice the age of some here), I would
consider the most active developers to work together, a requisite for
a cooperation.

> > This is NOT making open software in general look good. Smspillaz'
> > words of "a joke" is closer to the truth.
> Sadly true, too. But what excatly looks bad may be seen different from
> person to person.

Then try to listen to someone that:
1) hasn't been in the midst of discussion since the beginning of time
2) isn't religious when it comes to Beryl/Compiz
3) sees (in reality) the meaning of compromise

- Ketil