Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #90, on January 12th, 2013, 08:18 PM »
Quote from Arantor on January 12th, 2013, 07:54 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?

Of course, having reform of the entire organization (not how I don't want to call it a corporation) would be pretty much impossible because of the way people are; they don't want to put up with people they have disagreed with in the past and they probably wouldn't want to continue. 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?

Well, I think now this has to come down to the people in charge to start pushing their egos aside or doing something completely new because the time to find/take new developers is just too long. It's unfortunate but I think having a reform of the organization is what can bring people back... Because like I said previously, it's unlikely any developers will return with the same landscape, and the same politics in SMF. And what SMF is probably going to need more than anything are strong developers.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #91, on January 12th, 2013, 08:53 PM »
Quote
Right, but do you think people (or atleast you) would come back with a new change in the politics?
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.
Quote
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?
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.

I would note, I have heard from several current team members that they would be quite enthusiastic about seeing me back on the SMF team - there is sufficient change from how it was a few years ago about people coming and going that gives me hope, but that's not the biggest problem any more.
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #92, on January 12th, 2013, 09:14 PM »
Quote
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.
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.
Quote
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.
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. I only have my opinions on why some of them may not be appropriate to undertake these tasks, but I will leave that to the knowledgeable people who know more than me how Customizers work in the group, and then maybe I will have a further argument there. Atleast it is obvious that Customizers have experience working with SMF and are not incompetent with programming, but to what extent is it enough to be a developer is the question.

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...

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #93, on January 12th, 2013, 09:31 PM »
Quote
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.
I think I can sum it up best that if I didn't have Wedge to play with, I'd be back kicking arse and chewing gum - and be all out of gum.
Quote
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.
There has been drastic changes already. But yes, more change is needed.
Quote
On another note, there are people who already have an opportunity of doing this job, and those are the current Customizers.
The Cust team always was the breeding ground for the dev team. Virtually everybody who joined the dev team after the Cust team was formed came up through the Cust team one way or another. Just off the top of my head, the list of people who were in Cust team but had commit access includes Karl, SleePy, Sinan, SlammedDime, possibly Bloc[1], Norv, Suki, IchBin, Emanuele, Spuds and Lab. I've probably missed some people out, rather than put too many/wrong names in, but that gives you the scope of the Cust team, virtually everyone who could have been a dev came through there. In fact pretty much the only exception to that rule was Nao, who was a beta tester and Consulting Dev.

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.
Quote
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...
Not even every month.

One thing I would draw your attention to: http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?action=stats#stats

Look at the figures for the yearly summaries. What does that tell you?
 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 :)

Anthony`

  • Posts: 53
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #94, on January 12th, 2013, 09:42 PM »
Quote
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.
That is exactly what I wanted to bring up! :) 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.
Quote
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?
Good point, because the numbers can't be lying. It's already starting to happen.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #95, on January 12th, 2013, 09:45 PM »
Quote
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.
They are separate entities, and this is compounded by the apparent skills gap even between the Customizers around now, and what there was when I was a Customizer back in 2009.

Once upon a time I believe they were more intermixed than they are now.

Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #96, on January 13th, 2013, 12:39 AM »Last edited on January 13th, 2013, 01:53 AM by Bloc
Customizers were originally splitted in Mod team and Design team when SMF 1.1 was in effect, and we were building up what became SMF 2. It was decided to join them into Cuz team then, which I didn't so much care for seeing I knew it would water out the designers bit. I was right, almost all design people left, the mod people stayed on more or less but the damage was done.

Lately its been a trend to just jump teams if people(devs foremost) leave, paving for bizarre choices in leaders and "devs". 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. I would not have stepped into it though, if I wasn't sure I could follow the other devs in what they were doing.

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.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #97, on January 13th, 2013, 01:06 AM »
Quote
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.
Not just the first but pretty much the only one.
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.
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*.

Dismal Shadow

  • Madman in a Box
  • Me: Who is Arantor? Cleverbot: It stands for time and relative dimensions in space.
  • Posts: 1,185
“I will stand on my ground as an atheist until your god shows up...If my irreligious bothers you much, and if you think everything I do is heresy to your god I don't care. Heresy is for those who believe, I don't. So, it isn't heresy at all!


   Jack in, Wedge,
   EXECUTE!

emanuele

  • Posts: 125
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #99, on January 16th, 2013, 08:46 PM »
Sorry to jump in without having finished to read the entire topic (I'm still at the reply number 38), but I want to re-clarify something I found.
Quote from Arantor on January 11th, 2013, 06:51 AM
I would disagree actually... Almost everyone who has been dev team the last few years started in the Support team. Even Norv.
...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.
Quote from Kindred on January 11th, 2013, 02:47 PM
(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)
I already pointed you two times to a discussion (is available in the SM developers board) done by two BoD members before it was proposed the switch to the BoD (the post I linked is dated 11 May 2012, a link to that discussion was posted to the BoD attention in date May 16, and the proposal was approved by the BoD during the meeting of June), with the clear distinction of what a CLA is and what a DCO is. A small quote from that post:
Quote
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.
I think it's quite clear (it may be not perfectly correct, but the main idea is there).
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.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #100, on January 16th, 2013, 08:54 PM »
Quote
...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.
Yeah, I was being general there... *most* people went through support. Unknown took the view that to be a good dev, he had to be support as well. I take a similar mentality but I'm not nearly as pleasant as he is.
Quote
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?
This is why I said about the lack of misrepresentation. As frustrated as you, Spuds, Norv etc. must have felt, I just could not believe you'd actively be misrepresenting the DCO, and I was absolutely certain - without even seeing the team boards - that a certain degree of wilful blindness was going on. It's really not hard to see the difference between a DCO and a CLA if one actually sits and reads them.
Quote
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.
You do what you have to do. That's all anyone can ask of you. Say what you feel you have to say. Even if it might not be appropriate - maybe it'll cause something to happen to move things along.

Kindred

  • Posts: 166
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #101, on January 16th, 2013, 09:36 PM »
Actually Arantor, it was not emanuele or Spuds... I have never had any issues with anything said or done by either of them. :)

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...

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #102, on January 16th, 2013, 10:02 PM »
I deliberately did not ascribe any individual or individuals to whoever represented the DCO to the team, as it would have been between multiple people.

I'd love to see the quotes - unedited and in context - to back this up, because I'm finding it very hard to believe that you were misrepresented as to what a DCO means.

emanuele

  • Posts: 125
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #103, on January 16th, 2013, 10:55 PM »
Quote from Kindred on January 16th, 2013, 09:36 PM
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.
The dev board I linked is accessible to anyone with a friends badge.
I cannot be sure, but I'm confident you were still SM member (there are several messages from you dated the same period were you are discussing about several organization (and organizational) matters) at the time.
The director that proposed the change started three topics: one for documentation, one for code and one for forum posts. You answered in one of them (forum posts) agreeing with what said in that topic (and only that), but not disagreeing with any other.
I personally opened a topic about the same time asking if to become a team member it was mandatory to sign a CLA and if the project was allowed to accept external contributions with a proper license from people not having signed a CLA. In that topic I can see from you a weak "we should not accept".
The secretary (at the time) started another discussion with subject "discontinuing of CLA's". I can find some disagreement in destroying CLAs (that I can share), but that's a completely different story.
Nothing else (yes, I went back in your profile and read all the relevant posts (17 pages from April 15th to June 7th) during the DCO-to-CLA discussion...speaking of stubborn... :P).

You resigned on March 22nd. I don't remember any discussion about CLA and DCO before May (I myself didn't even know what "sing-off" meant before May when I started singing-off my commits: for reference my first signed-off commit, everything before that date is not signed, also because the DCO was added on May 11).

So, unless you discussed all your concerns privately, no, I have no elements to say you were against DCO.
Quote from Kindred on January 16th, 2013, 09:36 PM
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...
Misunderstand is one thing, accuse people of being liars is another.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Discussing Wedge on simplemachines.org
« Reply #104, on January 16th, 2013, 11:17 PM »
OK, so someone who shall not be named[1] has forwarded me copies of posts from 11 May 2012 explaining the DCO. I will not repeat the post verbatim; it is not in a public board but msg3332236 should be sufficient for you to find it.

He explains the idea behind moving from CLA to DCO and the problems that a CLA causes. As I see it there is no misrepresentation. Nothing he says intimates that the DCO 'does everything that a CLA does'. It is citing it as an alternative, it explains what it solves.

No-one seems to be questioning what the DCO does or does not do, nor is anyone offering up any downsides to it; it is simply stated that Thantos would prefer to use a DCO instead of a CLA and states his justifications.

As suspected, I'm not seeing any basis for misrepresentation here.
 1. Said person has not joined this particular debate but is aware of it.