OpenEuphoria

Re: A personnal view on open source and euphoria in particular.

• Posted by Juergen Luethje <j.lue at ?mx?de> Aug 01, 2007
• 922 views

Me wrote:

> Matt Lewis wrote:
> 
> > Juergen Luethje wrote:
> > > 
> > > jacques deschênes wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Open source is not about everyone going is own way, its about
> > > > collaboration.
> > > > Everyone as is preferences and is free to express them. But at some
> > > > point to
> > > > go further everyone as to accept compromises.  But it seem that some
> > > > people
> > > > just can go that way.  They have to go their own way, whatever others
> > > > thinks.
> > > > I have no problem with that as long as they distribute their own
> > > > softwares
> rather</font></i>
> > > > than trying to impose their view to a group.
> > > > On this list I see a lot of arguing about this and that. I personnaly
> > > > made a
> > > > proposition about @ oprator a few days ago but I saw that their was no
> > > > support
> > > > for it so I didn't insist. I don't want to waste my time an energy in
> > > > endless
> > > > arguing. There is to much of it on this list.
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > > I think you've already mentioned the main point.
> > > In another recent post you wrote:
> > > 
> > > | I predict the fall of euphoria if it stay as disorganinized as it is
> > > | at this moment.
> > 
> > <snip> 
> > 
> > > | Open source is not about everyone going is own way, its about
> > > collaboration.
> > > 
> > > _Successful_ open source projects are aware of this fact, and care for
> > > ways how to collaborate well organized and productive.
> > > OpenEuphoria currently looks and sounds to me like an orchstra without
> > > motes and without a conductor. But nobody would expect an orchestra to
> > > play good music that way.
> > 
> > I don't disagree with the sentiments expressed here, but I'm also not too
> > worried.  Open source euphoria is still pretty young.  We're still feeling
> > out how to organize, how to contribute, etc.
> 
> Yes, but I wonder how long we will continue to say, that we are just at
> the beginning. 
> My proglem is that I can't see any progress towards better organization.

Supplement:
Especially we need some agreement about a way, how
to decide which suggested changes should become part
of Euphoria, and which suggested changes should not.
Rob even wrote that he doesn't want to have a veto right.
So everyone can change Euphoria like he wants, or what?
It's obvious to me that currently there is lack of some
very basic rules. These are needed to end chaos and to
make progress, so they should be established ASAP.

Regards,
   Juergen

> > I think that Rob has correctly set the barrier to participation at a 
> > very low level (basically, just show interest, and you're granted commit 
> > access).  It's a bit too low for long term purposes, but it's probably 
> > a good way to kickstart the process.
> > 
> > The argument thread is something that I think shows up on just about any
> > list every few years.  Some people get tired of advocating for something,
> > especially if a competing view wins out, somehow.  Depending on the 
> > personalities involved, feelings can be hurt, and people leave the
> > community.  I don't think we're going to solve this problem, nor do we
> > have to.
> > 
> > Consider that the [arguably] most successful open source project in 
> > existence (Linux) just had a fight resulting in one developer abandoning
> > kernel development altogether.  If you haven't been following this 
> > story, just google "cfs vs sd".
> 
> Yes, something like that always can happen.
> I also was thinking of Linux, particularly of Ubuntu. Ubuntu is rather
> successful, and the Ubuntu people don't get tired to strongly emphasize
> the importance of good collaboration. I'm pretty sure that's the main
> reason for Ubuntu's success.
> 
> > Personally, I think it's a lot more interesting, useful and fun when there
> > is lots of debate around here.
> >
> > Matt
> 
> Regards,
>    Juergen