www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Costin Manolache <cos...@covalent.net>
Subject Re: Rules for Revolutionaries
Date Sat, 09 Nov 2002 16:50:06 GMT

I think you got your analogy mixed up completely :-)

The communism is characterized by dictatorship ( not always benevolent).
Most western countries are characterized by democracy. 

The communism didn't fall because of ideology - I can tell you the
ideology had little to do with the reality. At least in some countries
it fell because of centralized economy, abuses, etc. 

As for the "liberal ideology" - that's how apache has worked so far.
Every committer has a vote and a veto ( and unfortunately the veto
can turn anyone into a small dictator ). 


On Sat, 2002-11-09 at 00:29, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> I keep wondering why you keep bringing up Duncan's Whoa
> Bessie... mail. I mean this one:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=97712718421034&w=2
> Is it just for historical purposes? Is it because Duncan expresses
> interesting ideas with eloquence? Sure, Duncan may have been wrong in
> the Ant context but that should not discredit his ideas altogether.
> The liberal ideas expressed by Stefano, Sam and to some extent Costin
> are very inspiring and definitely please a wider audience than Duncan's
> ideas defending the actions of a selfish pig as he puts hit. (No, I
> don't think that Duncan is a selfish pig and you shouldn't either.)
> However, liberal ideologies are just that, ideologies. While Duncan's
> theory of benevolent dictators might not find favor in the eyes of
> this public, we should not discard it as being contrary to the Apache
> way. We should instead recognize it as being a legitimate way of
> development. It may even be the dominant way of development at Apache
> under disguise.
> In addition, it is much easier to stand up and talk about the interest
> of the community than the interests of individuals less you come off
> as supporting selfish pigs or being a selfish pig yourself.
> On a wider scale, it was very hard for the West to fight Communism
> because the communist ideology sells much better to the
> unprivileged. Yet 75 years later, the West won, not because of its
> persuasiveness but because it had much more to show on the store
> shelves than the communists. Communism is a great idea but it doesn't
> work. Capitalism is hard to sell but it ends up having better results
> on the long run.
> Coming back to Jakarta, I am not suggesting that anyone is at
> fault. All I am suggesting is that we to stop trashing the work
> achieved by individuals acting as clear leaders. Leadership is not bad
> per se.
> I may be stating the obvious here. So be it.
> At 11:01 07.11.2002 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:
> >I differ with that rendition, and believe that it is harmful to the 
> >community for it to be propogated.
> >
> >Duncan rejoined Ant and was immediately accepted as a committer.  He 
> >started work on an internal fork named "AntEater".  This went on for a 
> >short while, until another fork came along named "AntFarm".  At that 
> >point, Duncan said "Whoa Bessie" and started to put forward a case that he 
> >had a unique right to determine what codebase bore the Ant name.
> >
> >This lead up to a PMC meeeting with Brian and Roy in attendance where it 
> >was affirmed that the name of a project went with the expressed wishes of 
> >a majority of commmitters to that project.  This has been the policy that 
> >we have followed in Jakarta ever since.
> >
> >References:
> >
> >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=97712718421034&w=2
> >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=97712745500023&r=1&w=2
> >http://jakarta.apache.org/site/pmc/01-01-17-meeting-minutes.html
> >
> >- Sam Ruby
> >
> >P.S.  It is my understanding that what is now Apache HTTPD 2.0 is also the 
> >result of a number of forks, one of which ultimately emerged as being the 
> >one accepted by the community.
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> >For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
> >
> --
> Ceki
> TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be
> conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from
> others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org

View raw message