So this is kicking off again and the licence is being examined. Yay.
Just for the record, the exclusion against vbgamer was put in place after he excluded me from using goods for which I had paid for and revoked my licence; he was apparently willing to give me a partial refund if I apologised to him for the things I'd said (though he wasn't being asked to apologise for the comments he made about me, calling me - and I quote - 'a fucking liar' except would never state what it was I'd lied about when pushed) - but since that would be yet another compromise, I wouldn't back down. I bet he didn't mention the fact that he told me I couldn't build anything based on his work - not even converters to other systems of any kind.
As for the exclusion against Akyhne, that was after a mammoth argument where he violated Aeva's licence. You can - if you wish - go through the latter half of the crap at http://arantor.org/index.php?topic=168.0
(Also, what Motoko fails to realise, yet again, that by pushing things into Chit Chat, more people see Wedge than would have otherwise. Talk about backfiring.)
Why is it every time I find the time and motivation to contribute to Wedge, something comes along and leaves a nasty sour taste in my mouth?
It's been hard enough finding the time and motivation to work on it without having to deal with crap like this. As some people would remember, I'm not particularly happy writing this stuff any more, and I haven't been for months because all it's doing is making me greyer than before and leaving me feeling like I owe people.
But once I've fulfilled what I see as my obligations to this project, I'll disappear into the sunset and enjoy a less unpleasant, if quieter, life with it. I don't need this crap, but I also don't want to let people down like the way XenForo is going at the moment.
I'm not sure there was any recent discussion on Wedge in the Chit Chat board, but I did a search and found a couple of the forks board. To which I replied.
It's a private topic though. I remember the gist of it though, so I'm not going to search for my password just for that. ;)
I'm not sure that's much of an issue...
SMF has lost a lot of its momentum, which has shifted to other non-SMF-based solutions.
At this point, it would probably even make more sense for SM to push smCore aside (because I don't think it's ever going to be able to replace SMF in any capacity), and ask us to rename Wedge to 'SMF 3.0' and be done with it.
Really? I didn't see anything new in Motoko's comments... He's always been a bit of a Wedge basher, or more precisely, a Nao basher. Which I'm fine with, because I don't like me that much anyway.
Same here. Although I keep telling myself, two years of work shouldn't go to the bin, so let's release it... And see if we can find some renewed motivation after that.
A good decision we made was to feature-freeze it a few months ago, but it also makes it hard for us to find joy in developing when all we're doing is fixing bugs and trying to stop ourselves from implementing new features.
What do you see yourself doing in the future..?
I'm proud of what we've done so far. I just miss being able to write shit for myself.
My next project is probably going to be Deideo, my website about music thieves and homages turned wrong. But don't tell my girlfriend, she would kill me for even considering to build such a potentially lawsuit-inducing site.
It seems to me that Motoko was simply trying to spell things out, and make clear that nobody would be penalized for talking about talking about wedge.
The rules might seem silly, viewed from here, but the rules are the rules. Organizations make them, and then follow them in order to get on with the business of the day.
it is not completely prohibited to mention wedge, in the context of what the SMF community can learn from wedge.
"rules are rules" is hardly a cop-out. If we stick to the rules, we don't have to discuss them endlessly, and can (hopefully) move on to other things.
Holding major Wedge discussions in chit-chat rather than in the Forks board seems like a compromise that is more-or-less satisfactory to everyone with a say in the rules on simplemachines.org.
The eventual success of the SMF software, community, or project is not on your shoulders.
You may feel that the SMF project would sometimes serve itself better by making different choices than it has made.
I sometimes agree with you, and sometimes disagree with you. I appreciate it when you test and show the results of your testing. I generally have no argument with either one of you. I believe this to be true of many other members of the SMF project, even some members who have argued with one or the other of you in the past.
What were your goals then? What are they now? Which of these goals are worth pursuing in the future? Does the Wedge project bring progress towards these goals? Does it do it at an acceptable cost?
People enter and leave FLOSS projects and communities all the time for various reasons. If the product is compelling enough, there is always someone arriving interested in picking up where someone else has left off. An enduring project will have to accomodate and encourage this succession.
Don't stay in it out of vague "quitter's guilt" alone. Stay in it because you are working toward noble goals. And plan to replace yourself. You are unlikely to stay in it forever, no matter how noble the goals.
| 1. | And yes, I had noticed the fact that Norv was able to make a commit against the wishes of the project even after leaving. I thought that was hilarious in a way. |
For the license: Nao knows my belief on this issue ... simply great to see wedge open more but I still think the good section that should stay is in regards to our 2 favorite people
Also it seems you guys have more supporters on SMF Team and Simple Machines Team than you actually think
your recent wedge links ended up with the topic dieing out with no answer being decided but even the person who posted most negativity (and compared to previous posts from those that dont like wedge this was nothing) found out the poster also respects you guys, a few of us are fighting to remove the negativity that some people have and we are making progress.
| 1. | This is the second reason I hate the GPL, after its viral nature, because it's hypocritical. |
| 2. | Don't even get me started. I still don't appreciate the way the SMF team handled the whole me vs vbgamer thing, and the way that the 'mediation' was like every other fucking thing I've encountered with them, me being presented with a list of conditions, and given the appearance of ability to negotiate while knowing full well that nothing was negotiable. I lost $250, sure. vbgamer managed to screw himself out of more customers because of his idiotic attempt to ban me, and the team lost most of what credibility they had in my eyes for not understanding that I don't like being called a liar when the person making the claim won't back it up. I still don't appreciate a team member flat out accusing me of libel either. |
| 3. | Wedge Moderation Filters can prevent people posting if their post contains certain words. |
The compromise, of course, on "rules for the forks board" was among the at-the-time team members.
Team members are decision makers on that board.
On top of that, by simply being the first to fork the BSD-licensed SMF 2.0 code, you helped the entire SMF community (including the SMF team) get their heads around what it means to have more community participation in SMF code development.
As in -- "We went through a lot of trouble to switch to an open-source license, and we should promote open source"
I agree with you that the SMF project is not in tip-top shape at the moment. We have 2 devs at the moment, and will be in better shape with more devs. "Too many decision-makers" is an interesting comment. That's the team. Everyone on the team is a decision maker. Everyone gets a vote.
I don't think I will be breaking anybody's expectations of privacy by assuring you that I saw no evidence that the team was concerned about Wedge "killing" SMF
Arantor.... and your very statement proves that people on the dev team either want "it all" (i.e. no input from anyone except them) or are misunderstanding the team roles.
The way it is SUPPOSED to be working is:
the developers respond with reasons why X Y or Z may or may not be possible...
The dev lead sits down (virtually) with the steering committee and they (together) decide on what are "must-haves", "want-to'haves" and "won't be dones"
It is then up to the dev team to accomplish any of this.... and it is the dev lead's responsibility to see that his/her team is working toward the appropriate goals
the rest of the team gets back into the mix by testing the first alpha versions and commenting on the good, the bad and the ugly...
No where in this flow does anyone ever tell the dev team how or what to code... (well, I suppose the dev lead does tell the rest of the devs what needs to be coded, but that's all within dev.)
So, despite many complaints from former devs about other people telling them what to do, I fail to see that ACTUALLY occuring anywhere in the mix...
The big deal in the last few months was made into a huge deal because one former developers made an unauthorized and incorrect change to the LEGAL statement portion of every file... the change was noted and called out as something which should not have been done, and suddenly devs started screaming that they were being repressed
2. Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions of
this Agreement, You hereby grant to Simple Machines and to
recipients of software distributed by Simple Machines a perpetual,
worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of,
publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute Your
Contributions and such derivative works. Entities other than Simple
Machines are also granted these rights for re-distribution of original
or derivative works as far as allowed by the Simple Machines License.
| 1. | And that chasm is increasing all the time, only this week I've been rewriting the ban system, entirely. It doesn't have the ugly nasty query any more and should scale better. |
How are devs getting the shaft?
1- they get to discuss desired updates along with everyone else.
2- their team lead gets to decide the list of updates to be done with the SC. (that is the whole purpose of the SC, after all)
3- they get to work on the stuff that they want to work on, as previously discussed and decided...
As for copyright... you are correct. You hold the copyright to your own code. No one has ever claimed otherwise.
However, SM holds the copyright to the set of code that is SMF. This does not detract from or remove the copyright of each and every individual contributor, but SM holds the copyright to its software.
(BTW: the copyright statement that you reference was borrowed from the Apache foundation... and I don;t see any former contributors trying to claim that Apache doesn't hold the copyright to its software. So, for Norv or anyone else to claim otherwise for SMF is just silly.)
I am still not sure why devs left from the fall out of Norv's idiocy... It was so seriously blown out of proportion when all we originally did was ask that the change be reverted.
(I do agree on the permissions thing - there is no way that she ever should have had the permission to commit that change without review and approval)
When it breaks down is when people insist that they know better. (either devs saying "no one else should ever have any input, because we are the only ones that matter" or non-devs saying "we get to tell the devs what do do)
However, to this point, the only ones who have violated the process are the devs who have literally made that first statement... that devs are the only ones who matter and that the other teams just don't matter at all, since "anyone can do what the rest of you do"
I think that you are premature in declaring smf to be a dead project. People said the same thing before 2.0 came out... and while it was a long time coming, SMF did chug along... and like that, I have confidence that SMF will continue to chug along.
The discussion about the Forks discussion board really was about the open source issue.
As in -- "We went through a lot of trouble to switch to an open-source license, and we should promote open source", with a dash of "I'm a bit angry at those Wedge fellows at the moment, but I don't think that really influences my opinion on the license issue".
It is lovely to see people turn over a positive new leaf isn't it? A lovely way to start the new year!
/**
* Wedge
*
* Handles various security-related tasks, including permissions and filtering of input based on known malicious behavior.
*
* @package wedge
* @copyright 2010-2013 Wedgeward, wedge.org
* @license http://wedge.org/license/
*
* @version 0.1
*//* Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
* contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
* this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
* The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
* (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
* the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
*
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
*
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
* distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
* WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
* limitations under the License.
*//* Licensed to Wedgeward under one or more contributor license agreements.
* See the NOTICE file distributed with this work for additional
* information regarding copyright ownership.
* Wedgeward licenses this file to You under the MPL License, Version 2.0
* (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
* the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
*
* http://wedge.org/license/
*
* @version 0.1
*/What Norv did was not switch the license and copyright to indicate "see file"
What she did was change the copyright line attribution.
As for the legal matter... you may be right (and, in which case, there are several other issues that need to be taken up within the team regarding the switch to the DCO and lying about what that did/does when they requested it)
Agnelina is actually talking with lawyers to get a definitive answer...
I don't really think there's been misrepresentation with what the DCO is, unless wilful blindness was involved and fingers-in-ears-la-la-la-can't-hear-you as well. It's really straightforward, it says SM can use the code, in line with the licence, such that the code is copyrighted to its authors and not SM. This change from Norv was pretty much about bringing the code in line to what the DCO says is in force.
IOW, substantively and practically speaking, the same as what the CLA allowed as far as SMF being able to use the code, but without any pretension or illusions as to ownership, unlike the CLA.
Bloc...
See, this is the thing I don't understand...
The dves have never been "steered" or "controlled" by anyone (except maybe their own dev lead)
Others have expressed opinions on what was getting added (or removed) and may have requested that something get added... but no one, to the best of my knowledge has ever tried to tell the devs how to code... or even what to code, once the "desired feature list" was discussed and decided on... and AFAIK, the devs have always made that decision (even if it realistically should sit with the SC)
the people complaining (former devs) all seem to be saying "I can't work like this, I can't have people telling me what to do and how to do it" --- but I have never seen anyone actually DOING that to the devs... The closest we non-devs have come to that was insisting that the rets of the team has a right to give our INPUT on what we think should be added (or removed).
This is not a new scenario, and while its a good while since I was involved, its hasn't improved since the mess that was Amacythe++ was around, well, not so much you would expect anyway. Talented devs still leave, less talented stay and eventually, leave too...
lol, anyway, if you want to stay in your belief that devs are just stubborn and drama queens, by all means do. Its a slow death for SMF and has been for some time now.
It seems that Arantor and Nao are the only ones being still standing in the forking aftermath of SMF going BSD..but I feel several others haven't quite left the arena yet. Elkarte enjoys some former devs enthusiasm,and thats good. Building something is always good, and I strongly believe many of them(certainly myself - although i stayed with my own devices) ENJOYS not being "steered" and "controlled" and most important, feeling they would just be doing the dirty work.
So yeah..maybe it isn't possible to run SMF like a corporation where things get decided and people are told to do stuff. Maybe its best to let it die, so new forces can flourish and be free to change, to try out, to INNOVATE. It certainly isn't "innovative" that comes to mind when I see SMF these days.
ok, I'll be quiet now. :P
But again, its not a black and white process, as a fellow Libran I am sure you see this, Kindred. :) It is a limit for everything though, and that limit has been crossed too many times in the SMF camp IMHO.
But at least know that all of the devs that left, that left BECAUSE of the team and not for personal reasons, didn't actually want to. But what can you do? The fun must be there, I don't particular like to feel bad when I join projects, I might if I MUST, in the case of RL work perhaps - but even then its some leeway towards saying "I can't work like this".
so it's a slightly different model from the mature product that SMF currently is.
See, there is still ROOM for creativity and even for last minute additions.
I'll note - Agile/Incremental Sprint releases are even easier to handle this sort of thing (even though the SMF team has violently rejected any suggestion of agile) because you're working in much shorter timeframes than years or even months.
Anyways... this is all just me rambling on what I *THINK* should be done or how it could be handled. I am (more or less happily) back down in the support ranks again and have no actual power to affect anything. I'd just like to see
a- some developers come back or new ones start - with this sort of thing in mind
b- a strong PM and dev lead who will actually lead AND work together
(as opposed to what happened with me and Norv, where she wanted all the power and felt the PM should basically be a figurehead or what happened before where the PM tried to rule the project with an iron fist... or what we have now, which is no good dev lead and (essentially) no PM.) All of those models are wrong.
and, as far as I know, no one on the team has done so since then either. So, my only conclusion as to why the recent devs have left is that either they are childish gits who are so full of themselves that they can not conceive that anyone should be able to even suggest that there might be a good idea outside of their own minds (a possibility, I admit)... or (which is more likely) the whole thing is based on a series of misunderstandings and overreactions which folks are either too embarrassed or too stubborn to discuss.
Yes... we all are a buch of egocentric bastards:
I left because you keep trying to run things like a corporation and fail to realize that SMF is an open source project now.
i left because, what did you call me? oh yeah, a poisonous people and you were suppose to replace me with some other person who can work under your command.. I'm still waiting as I'm eager to meet my replacement
And lastly, I left because no one actually saw me as a dev, even in this whole convo... I was never approached when the whole Norv thing imploded, never approached to do anything, heck, I wasn't even approached when Dialogo started... talking about feeling like a complete outkast... neither of both sides wanted me :P so thats why I decided to work on my own, to let people know what I'm capable of...
I tried to give SMF some directions (currently there is none...),
You're wrong, not even a feasible explanation on why I was suppose to be wrong at...
Oh, BTW, I started on support, moved to Cust, did a lot of documentation in Spanish, a good portion of the Spanish_latin language was done by me... so yeah, I'm not a codemonkey only nor am I the egocentric bastard you think all devs are...
Seems to me that the underlying issue with all this stems from peoples DIFFERENCES OF OPINION in all areas of development / management. Resulting in feelings of rejection, questions of self worth, challenges of ego, beliefs that one persons ideas are far better than another's and so on. And the fact that no resolve is possible purely because you simply cant please everyone!
Having to cater for everyone's whim is one thing that SMF is stuck with and it becomes infinitely harder as the team expands whereas in Wedges case less people result in fewer clashes of opinion. Things can be discussed and resolved in a timely fashion without encountering the red tape and personality clashes that are prevalent in a larger scale operation.
I cannot understand the fear of "breaking" SMF so to speak..why could not the work being done in forks now, have been done inside SMF too? It would make a lot of sense if SMF embraced forking, or rather "directions" instead of trying to follow a "safe" path and alienate everything else(which is even done mostly by ex-SMF people lol).
Don't assume that bluntness = patronizing, because it does not and was not in my case.
All those words I said months ago are becoming a reality now... as sad as that statement is.
Suki, I think you have misunderstood... and I guess the only thing I can point a finger at would be a language/cultural barrier.
To the best of my knowledge, the majority of my "you are wrong" statements were because you kept confusing the project with the organization.
Also, the curse words are another cultural thing. I am a new englander american. We use curse words as emphasis, as commentary and to express incredulity... it's a part of our culture up here. I actually use such much more in spoken conversations than in written (as do most of my associates). Thus reinforcing my belief that there has to be a cultural gap here...
Yup... I btought up the corp versus project stuff because THAT was the stuff which you posted on that I commented on. I had no opinion on your other stuff and thus did not post.
Well, because you so consistantly misinterpret what I say that it is either willful or just because you are not understanding what I am saying.
and you might note that the past few posts, Arantor and I have been saying the exact same thing. SMF needs two solid, strong leaders. one for dev and one as PM.
/mewants his time back which was wasted by reading this thread.
Hmmm... We'll have to disagree on your commentary of cursing. ;)
I have studied etymology, not sociology, but it shows a somewhat different perception.
:p
as for what you have misunderstood...
Well, you accused me of telling you that you were wrong all the time, of calling you a poison personality and several other things... None of which I actually did. The only time, that I can recall saying that oh were wrong, consistently, was when you had commentary on the org versus project.
Oh yes, and you basically said that devs leaving SMF is all my fault, because I demand control over them... Which is also untrue.
Hmmm... What else? Oh... That i perceive a grudge when people disagree with me.
Did I miss any of your accusations?
Basically, you seem to have a very bizarre and mistaken view of me.
and you might note that the past few posts, Arantor and I have been saying the exact same thing. SMF needs two solid, strong leaders. one for dev and one as PM.
I don't think that matters so much. I think there is an understanding on both sides as to what is needed, but the fundamental change most needed isn't going to happen: getting great people up top running the show. We even agree on what traits are necessary, but people who are known in the community as having the necessary things don't want the job. Which means recruiting outside the community, which is nigh on impossible.
Right, but do you think people (or atleast you) would come back with a new change in the politics?
I think the biggest problem is the people in charge vs. the people who can move SMF forward as a competitive product because let's face it: the developers are the ones with the time, energy, passion, and skills to push out great updates, while the people in charge need to do their jobs in making sure the project runs smoothly. Since the developers don't want to come back, and the people in charge probably don't want them back, now what?
Me? No, but it's not because of that. Me returning to SMF as a developer would limit what I can do with Wedge, I can't commit time as a developer to both, it wouldn't be fair on whichever project I'm not writing code for at the time, and I can't do that in good conscience. There are various other technical issues with doing that, namely the differences in code base.
Therein lies the problem. SMF needs to find people that have the skill, the time, the passion etc. to make it happen - the project needs developers far more than the developers need SMF, and that's a hurdle that is not insurmountable, but it's big enough.
This response atleast gives me hope that other developers might feel (somewhat) the same. But you are completely fair in your reasoning, and I think that's why Wedge will continue to grow.
Right, and the issue is that there are competent people hanging around but they've already been through the issues of working with SMF and the organization, and that will probably require a drastic change to get them in the position.
On another note, there are people who already have an opportunity of doing this job, and those are the current Customizers.
As for looking for developers... Well, I don't think it is very feasible. It's not like we have developers arriving to SMF every week...
| 1. | I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure Bloc was dev team at one point, e.g. around 1.1 and what was then NDT. Bloc, if I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me :) |
Though, given some of the things I've seen lately, I would have plenty more to say on the relative skills of some of the Customisers. Theoretically, they're supposed to be proto-devs, knowing the guts of SMF pretty well, but writing things that aren't intended to be core features, as well as reviewing mods from the community, for technical or logistical or security issues. Trouble is, I'm not seeing anything of substance coming out of the Customisers that indicates they've got what it takes to be devs.
One thing I would draw your attention to: http://www.simplemachines…ex.php?action=stats#stats
Look at the figures for the yearly summaries. What does that tell you?
Now this is even trickier because when your prototypes aren't ready to be released as developers, and with the lack of current developers, then the problem is greater than it could have been. I've always wondered if Customizers had a close relationship with the core developers, or if they were treated as two seperate entities.
AFAIK I was the first dev that was purely there for the design skills, to focus on that, and primary because I made the Core and Curve designs - but ALSO because I had proved my PHP skills in writing TinyPortal.
That cannot be said for recent years team jumping, and its a shame. It proves my point that these teams and the desire to be higher up kills the peer mentality, it makes people look more at what they ARE(as in position) than it what they CAN.
I would disagree actually... Almost everyone who has been dev team the last few years started in the Support team. Even Norv.
(and, in which case, there are several other issues that need to be taken up within the team regarding the switch to the DCO and lying about what that did/does when they requested it)
With a DCO, there are no copyright assignments being made. The project could not change the license for the software without getting permission from all the code authors.
...heck I skipped the support team! But I'm still pretty much the only one doing support on the Italian board...I'm pretty sure even Unknown did a *lot* of support and as far as I can see he was not that bad at it.
So, would you please stop of publicly (I can pass over when you do it privately on a team board, but not when you do it publicly on another forum) accusing people of being liars when it's just that you didn't read a topic?
I'm really tempted to quote your words from another topic (The board voted. You had a chance to comment when the board was discussing and voting.), but it's probably not polite, so I will refrain.
emanuele, regarding the DCO and the official switch to it... I think that happened while I was resigned... didn't it? and even prior to that, I was against the switch when it was first mentioned and only shut up when I was specifically told that the DCO would cover everything that the CLA covered.
Anyway.... I (and several others) feel that it was misrepresented to us. Remember (as people have pointed out to me a number of times in criticism of me) It's not about the facts or even specifically what was said - it's about how it was (mis)understood and perceived...
| 1. | Said person has not joined this particular debate but is aware of it. |
| 1. | Though, not until after a legal battle. |
regardless... as I said, several of us (including at least one board member) were given the IMPRESSION that the DCO was a straight 1 for 1 replacement of the CLA.
(and yes, Arantor, owning the copyright means that SMF could, if necessary, change the license without getting signoff from every individual who has ever contributed code. That was the entire reason behind the CLA in the first place. We all saw the massive idiocy and mess that happened when Joomla tried to grant an exception to their GPL.)
| 1. | And it doesn't have to be outright. I'm well aware that I didn't get made Cust. team leader because people specifically voted to make sure I didn't - not because I wasn't up to the job, but because they wanted to see me join the dev team rather than stick it out in Cust. Yup. I was told this by the person who masterminded it. |
Do note, Arantor... I have not blamed any DEVS for this misunderstanding. The person who said that to me is not a dev.
and once again... I object to the claim that we drove anyone away...
IchBin left and I won't go into what I think of that (aside from I believe it was extremely childish)
Spuds left because one of the board made a poor joking suggestion which someone passed on to him with the belief that it was real.
Suki left because she didn't like what SMF was planning. She felt that all development on any 2.x should stop and all efforts be put into OOP... Others did not agree.
emanuele has not left yet... when he's done with this release and leave, I am still not sure I understand why...
However, the reason some people have CLAIMED for leaving in the past is because the devs don't have total control, or others are trying to tell the devs what to do and how to do it.
but no one, to the best of my knowledge has ever even tried to interfere with the development or coding process.
I won't argue with the resulting mess... just with the suggested cause.
As for your number 4... we have actually made an attempt to separate the political BS out of the project - and have mostly been successful (aside from instances like Suki who didn't seem to understand the separation - or, at leats, were always questioning it)
I don't know about such masterminded BS that you mention... I believe that was before I started paying attention to the crap going on in the team boards.
regarding the copyright... again... we disagree on the need for it...
And lastly, I left because no one actually saw me as a dev, even in this whole convo... I was never approached when the whole Norv thing imploded, never approached to do anything, heck, I wasn't even approached when Dialogo started... talking about feeling like a complete outkast...
neither of both sides wanted me :P
so thats why I decided to work on my own, to let people know what I'm capable of...
| 1. | and at that point you may wonder how can I think to move SMF if I don't have the knowledge to start a fork: good question, let me know the answer when you find it :P | ||
| 2. | that is something I suggested you to do when you still were on the team ;) | ||
| 3. | May be interesting the story behind the name "Dialogo": he posted an excerpt from wikipedia about Galileo related to his importance on simple machines(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_machine) and one the first thing that came to my mind was: Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo(http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogo_sopra_i_due_massimi_sistemi_del_mondo)[1] that inspired (to me) a quite ironic parallelism with the events at sm.org: Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief Development Systems: "organization" centric and "development" centric
|
Suki left because she didn't like what SMF was planning. She felt that all development on any 2.x should stop and all efforts be put into OOP... Others did not agree.
Suki left because there seems to have been some kind of shutting out going on. When you get to the stage where people stop listening to what you have to say because it's you saying it, you're being shut out - and that is one form of not having your say in how things are run, especially with what you make.
I can't speak for the others. For what I'm concerned I didn't even thought of inform anyone...
but you decided to start coding a forum from scratch
Eww, another misinterpretation...
but no, you guys where too busy saying No to every idea but your own... which was of course, keep working on 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, release 2.3 with only a few features
It is amusing you keep saying how wrong am I with the whole SM - SMF thing when Arantor said the exactly same things I said months ago, the very same arguments for what I was told I was so wrong... suddenly now that Arantor had said those things, they become valid and deserves been listening to, awesome! at least now the ideas will finally get discussed.
which is why I registered here mainly, to at least be able to tell my version.
Working on a new software is just my way and solution to deal with all of this, nothing more, I'm not gonna start a raging campaign against SMF claiming I'm the one and only SMF messiah
ummm... no, Arantor.
I certainly never said no to any idea of new development... nor did anyone else.
What we said to Suki was "OOP is all good.... but we should not stop work continuing in the 2.x line"
So, no one shut her out. Because we disagreed with her idea to completely stop development on 2.x after the 2.1 release, she seems to have assumed that means that we rejected OOP.
IIRC, what was actually said was "we can't just stop development of 2.x while you work on a completely new design that will take years to actually release." (which, BTW: Was exactly the same argument that was presented to Norv when SHE wanted to stop all 2.x development and only work on SMC (which was, at the time planned for 2-3 years out). The statement was followed up with something along the lines of "It is all well and good to work on OOP and something new... but we can't just drop the old stuff, either"
So, yup... I SAY IT AIN'T SO... and I call BS.
| 1. | Which is a backfire waiting to happen. |
Ema's too nice for that
You are right... emanuele, as wonderful as he is, is too nice (might come from still being young and not as cynical as us old fogeys)
| 1. | I'm so cynical that I'm still sitting by the side of the river waiting to see where all the opinions the team wants to give are (I posted something mostly ignored by the vast majority...well I got 1 answer), if I don't see any interest from those that are actually *very* interested in the matter I don't waste more of the minimum amount of time possible. |
| 2. | I'm so cynical that I don't give a damn about the name. What I'm interested in is the code. I'm interested in improving it, make it nicer (that doesn't imply I write nice code, in fact it's the exact opposite :P), easier to use, etc. But the name can be SMF, Elkarte, Wedge, Dialogo, whatever as long as it is funny to work with the people involved. |
I had a suggestion a while ago but was (quite correctly) shot down because it was not actually a very good idea (see, I can admit to being wrong, it occasionally happens. :P )
This was out of pure courtesy really, but is not only that.Quote from emanuele on January 17th, 2013, 05:45 PM I can't speak for the others. For what I'm concerned I didn't even thought of inform anyone...
I constantly read about chats between you and Spuds regarding 2.1, I used to enter IRC and having my msn always open as much as possible, yes I talked to you fairly often but it was never in a "working environment", it was always as plain casual chatting. The same with Norv and IchBin.
Anyway, 2.1 development passed just in front of me like a train with no way to get up, I mean, yes I could have sent lots of pull requests I made completely blinded, dunno if that would helped that much, after all, you guys seemed to work just fine together.
I was expecting something like "we can divide dev work, ones focusing on 2.x and others on 3.0" or some other idea, the point was to keep an open mind and be tolerant with the other side's ideas... but you simply don't seem to grasp that concept, It's what you want and nothing else, always what you want, all the time.
Just off the top of my head, the list of people who were in Cust team but had commit access includes [...], Emanuele
This is something I tried to bang a drum about a bit back. I suggested either having a single 'team' badge, or displaying multiple badges for people to reflect the different things they do. Either of those seems to me to be better about focusing on what people can *do* rather than what they *are*.Quote That cannot be said for recent years team jumping, and its a shame. It proves my point that these teams and the desire to be higher up kills the peer mentality, it makes people look more at what they ARE(as in position) than it what they CAN.
Maybe SM Core will fix this
For anyone to be able to catch the torch, the old guard needs to let the torch go or at least understand that the torch is not a property they can manipulate at will anymore ;)
smCore is dead.
The old guard isn't going to be able to hold the torch for long, eventually they would become tired and weary.Quote from Suki on March 11th, 2013, 06:59 PM For anyone to be able to catch the torch, the old guard needs to let the torch go or at least understand that the torch is not a property they can manipulate at will anymore ;)
smCore is dead.
Not if the old guard uses new, naive blood that just doesn't know where are they getting at.Quote from nend on March 11th, 2013, 07:38 PM The old guard isn't going to be able to hold the torch for long, eventually they would become tired and weary.Quote from Suki on March 11th, 2013, 06:59 PM For anyone to be able to catch the torch, the old guard needs to let the torch go or at least understand that the torch is not a property they can manipulate at will anymore ;)
smCore is dead.
You mean like Labradoodle?
/mebursts into laughter.
Team members over there are like Greek gods (I used to use an analogy between team boards and mount Olympus). People admire team members and wants to be on the team.
Old school/seasoned team members can easily manipulate this new blood because the new blood is:
Then the new blood finds out the cake is a lie and decides to leave but then again there is another batch of new blood ready to be fetched at the front door and so the loop continues.