[Compcomm] Forum Decision

[RYX]

First to say - sorry for answering on totally off-topic things :)

Am Freitag, den 11.05.2007, 19:21 +0200 schrieb Kristian Lyngstøl:
> On 5/11/07, Mike Dransfield <mike at blueroot.co.uk> wrote:
> > Ive already seen people upset with changes being made to
> > their plugins/code without their knowledge or approval.
> 
> The fact that I was upset about an update was never related to Danny's
> write access to the project. Because the code was available, he could
> port my plugins. If my work wasn't public, he couldn't know wether he
> was working on the most recent version or not. And it is very likely
> that he wouldn't have ported it at all. Sure, we disagree, but that's
> what happen when multiple people cooperate.
> 
> Closed door development, which is what you are advocating, does not
> really make sense in a free software project.
I can't see anything closed-source concerning the python-plugin.
Especially in the case of an embedded API and several types of
abstraction it makes sense to be not too public before a first stable
release (stable in sense of a more or less complete API and some basic
testing of all functionality). Once the python-plugin is at such a state
I am sure Mike will put in in a public repo.

> 
> Packing up a git repo and requiring your fellow devs to manually
> download this every time you make an update is just kicking your
> contributors in the nuts. I know I would never put out with bullshit
> stuff like that, when it takes about half a moment to set up a public
> git repo for everyone to use. And I'm not even talking about write
> access.
> 
> You seem very afraid to reveal to others that you, like everyone else,
> fucks up their own code from time to time. You also seem to think not
> letting people see this will make the situation better.
> 
> All I can say, is that you seem very insecure about your own work.
> You've been building this huge self image on these mailinglists by
> bashing everyone and everything around you, and it seems to me you're
> terrified to let anyone see that you too make mistakes.
> 
> The support requests you speak of is a non-issue, too. It's just
> stretching for excuses to not let people activly participate in the
> development.
This may be true for "normal" effect-plugins but not for an embedded
engine. If you want to participate in the development you will first
need to understand what we did and agreed on before you are able to do
any contributions (except bugfixes). Creating a sane embedded API is not
as simple as generating a swig- or pyrex-interface, at least if you want
to do it good. It needs much discussion and patience.

And besides that - Mike and I were trying to gather developers for
creating a scripting-plugin since about one year (I started the whole
scripting-plugin discussion back in old compiz-quinnstorm forums). There
was no real interest in that from any side so we finally did it on our
own. If people were really interested in contributing to that plugin
they will likely contact Mike or me and get all info they need - but
that never happened so there seems to be no real need for a repo in this
case.

> 
> Because really, that's what you're doing. Your source may be open, but
> not your development method.
Remember how David did it with compiz or MacSlow did it with lowfat -
first they created a running application, then they set up a public repo
to let people take part. It is highly counterproductive to be too public
in early stages of development.

:)
>