Rob,
I think that you've missed my point. The guy didn't THREATEN to leave.
He HAS left. I doubt we will get him back. My strong reaction was
because of that entirely avoidable loss of 5+ man-years of project
expertise that we will be pressed to recover for the sake on an
ill-considered shout-down. Was this really wise?
Yes, I have only been on the DL for two days, but I have been a major
contributor to community side of the OOo project for five years. And in
my 30+ years in this business, I've seen lots of f***ed up project
take-overs in my business unit. I was trying to flag up that this old
dog is starting to sniff another one, and I would REALLY like to prevent
this happening.
You seem to be positioning yourself as the project leader and absolute
arbiter of Apache policy, and YOU have caused a valuable asset to this
project to walk, yet you seem to be totally unaware of this -- or are
and don't care. If we keep this up then this Apache project will drive
away many if not most of the ex-OOo team who want to contribute. You'll
be left with an extremely tidy and well-managed DL but no OpenOffice
product.
If this is the Apache way, then this will be a sad outcome. But is this
the Apache way or just your individual interpretation? I do wonder what
is the biggest project that you've run personally, or have you even done
this before?
Regards Terry
On 02/08/11 14:40, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:00 AM, TerryE<ooo@ellisons.org.uk> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> Regardless... it doesn't matter to me anymore. I'm stepping out of
>>> this discussion now, and stepping away from anything to do with OOo
>>> documentation, including the OOo Wiki.
>>>
>>> Clayton
>> This was the outcome of an ill considered discussion. Clayton, is the one
>> guy who really understands how the documentation is put together. He's been
>> working full time on this for at least 5 years that I know of. He was
>> kicked in the teeth by Oracle, albeit for ration if perhaps impersonal
>> commercial drivers, and now has to consider his future options. Despite
>> this and somewhat to my surprise he was willing to re-engage and support OOo
>> in the future within Apache. His departure would truly be a loss to the
>> project and one that I think we all should regret.
>>
>> In my naiveté I did get the impression that the project would be a flat
>> consensual collaborative organisation rather than a hierarchical dictat,
>> albeit with the Apache umbrella. OK, I fully accept that I don't
>> understand the "Apache way" yet, but in my days in EDS I had technical
>> oversight in taking over many account teams and ensuring continuity of
>> service (most far larger than this project) as well as running large teams
>> myself. I have no interest in shovelling this shit in future but I do know
>> how to get the team to vanish like sand through your fingers. One sure way
>> is not to listen to considered and rational experience, to ride roughshod
>> over peoples input, and to use sarcasm as a tool in sensitive dialogue.
>> These people are volunteers contributing pro-bono, not servants. If this
>> is going to be the culture of this project, then it is going to wither and
>> die.
>>
> By your strong reaction, Terry, after only being on the list for 2
> days, I suspect that you are not yet accustomed to the way we are
> debating. No one is shutting anything down. We're discussing. When
> there is consensus then we move forward.
>
> Decision making at Apache is described here:
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#management
>
> It is a good read. In particular I see nothing about trying to force
> decisions by threatening to leave the project. But maybe I missed
> that line ;-)
>
> And remember experience at OOo is not the sole fons et origo of
> wisdom. There are other sources of relevant knowledge and experience.
> We should try to respect all views raised on this list, and not try
> to close down arguments by saying, "That's the way we always did it at
> OOo" or "I'm more experienced in doing things my way, therefore
> everyone else should yield". Those are not ways to reach consensus.
> Similarly, there are parts of Apache that are non-negotiable and areas
> where we have some discretion in the project. The Apache 2.0 license
> is an example of something that is non-negotiable.
>
> -Rob
|