Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/10/02/16:58:24
--f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:58 AM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
> > +1. John Doty has afterall pretty well demonstrated that his skin
> > is thick enough if you have something mean to say about him it can
> > go on a public list :)
>
> It's not about saying something mean, it's about saying something
> private. Like a home address or medical condition. A closed private
> mailing list in this case is no different than manally typing in a
> list of addresses, except it's a lot more convenient and reliable.
>
You have alluded in the past to private complaints, and "people problems"
usually means the unpleasant aspects of people's personalities, so I'm a
little skeptical about this.
Also, a common case of a private discussion in gcc-land is that the
> steering committee never discusses new maintainers in public. Privacy
> allows them to be candid amongs themselves, and prevents others from
> commenting when they shouldn't. After they discuss, they make a
unified decision public. This is generally recognized as "the right
> way" as it ensures that the people who are empowered to make the
> decisions can make the decisions, and the people who are not empowered
> to do so cannot influence the results. (much like a jury trial, where
> the jurists discuss in private and announce a single result).
>
I'm not sure I'd hold up gcc as an example of the right way. Debian does
it with open candidacy and voting and achieves pretty good results as well.
And those are gigantic projects relative to gEDA.
The situation with gEDA is we're lucky if we get *one* guy who wants to do
what Markus has been doing. Yes, he can be abrasive. But if that
consideration has caused him to be excluded in some way, and that in turn
caused him to do stuff that caused the current kerfuffle, I would call that
a
bad thing and an example how the private discussion approach is not
working particularly well.
> And John's name is spelled "Doty" :-)
>
That's annoying, he should change it so it matches what I think
--f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 10:58 AM, DJ Delorie <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:dj AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank">dj AT delorie DOT com</a>></span=
> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bo=
rder-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
> +1.=C2=A0 John Doty has afterall pretty well demonstrated that his ski=
n<br>
<span class=3D"">> is thick enough if you have something mean to say abo=
ut him it can<br>
> go on a public list :)<br>
<br>
</span>It's not about saying something mean, it's about saying some=
thing<br>
private.=C2=A0 Like a home address or medical condition.=C2=A0 A closed pri=
vate<br>
mailing list in this case is no different than manally typing in a<br>
list of addresses, except it's a lot more convenient and reliable.<br><=
/blockquote><div><br></div><div style=3D"">You have alluded in the past to =
private complaints, and "people problems"</div><div style=3D"">us=
ually means the unpleasant aspects of people's personalities, so I'=
m a</div><div style=3D"">little skeptical about this.</div><div style=3D"">=
<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bord=
er-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Also, a common case of a private discussion in gcc-land is that the<br>
steering committee never discusses new maintainers in public.=C2=A0 Privacy=
<br>
allows them to be candid amongs themselves, and prevents others from<br>
commenting when they shouldn't.=C2=A0 After they discuss, they make a=
=C2=A0</blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
unified decision public.=C2=A0 This is generally recognized as "the ri=
ght<br>
way" as it ensures that the people who are empowered to make the<br>
decisions can make the decisions, and the people who are not empowered<br>
to do so cannot influence the results.=C2=A0 (much like a jury trial, where=
<br>
the jurists discuss in private and announce a single result).<br></blockquo=
te><div><br></div><div style=3D"">I'm not sure I'd hold up gcc as a=
n example of the right way.=C2=A0 Debian does</div><div style=3D"">it with =
open candidacy and voting and achieves pretty good results as well.</div><d=
iv style=3D"">And those are gigantic projects relative to gEDA.</div><div s=
tyle=3D""><br></div><div style=3D"">The situation with gEDA is we're lu=
cky if we get *one* guy who wants to do</div><div style=3D"">what Markus ha=
s been doing.=C2=A0 Yes, he can be abrasive.=C2=A0 But if that</div><div st=
yle=3D"">consideration has caused him to be excluded in some way, and that =
in turn</div><div style=3D"">caused him to do stuff that caused the current=
kerfuffle, I would call that a=C2=A0</div><div style=3D"">bad thing and an=
example how the private discussion approach is not=C2=A0</div><div style=
=3D"">working particularly well.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding=
-left:1ex">
And John's name is spelled "Doty" :-)<br></blockquote><div><b=
r></div><div style=3D"">That's annoying, he should change it so it matc=
hes what I think</div><div>=C2=A0</div></div><br></div></div>
--f46d043c7fba9d7d5d0521256a7d--
- Raw text -