trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: May 2018

Re: [trinity-devel] What a trinity leader should have done.

From: wofgdkncxojef <wofgdkncxojef@...>
Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 22:15:02 +0200

On 05/28/2018 07:30 PM, Slávek Banko wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I suppose that the members of our community know me enough and that there
> will be no objection if I label myself as the deputy leader for the cases
> when Tim is busy and can not be here. That is why I will now speak not
> only on my own behalf but on behalf of our community.
> 
> 
> Dne ne 27. května 2018 wofgdkncxojef@... napsal(a):
>> 1. Shut down the user mailing list, and drag you kicking and screaming,
>> to an official reedit
>>
> 
> Great idea - we could get other "contributors" who just talk, scream or
> tell us their wonderful moods... But just a chatter does not make any
> move forward. This represents only an unnecessary waste time of all
> participants.
> 
> We do not just want to talk, we want to discuss in a constructive way. And
> therefore the mailing lists will remain here.
> 
> 
>> 2. Shut down the git repo, and drag you kicking and screaming to
>> github.
>>
> 
> Another great idea. As you earlier said yourself - it's not for any
> technical reason. On the contrary, others have stated several technical
> reasons why not to do so.
> 
> I add more: Currently, we have 179 individual GIT repositories. But we
> have one common wiki and one common bugzilla. At Github each individual
> repository had its own issues and wiki - very impractical for us. At the
> same time, issues on Github do not provide features like bugzilla.
> 
> Your thought that moving to Github will attract crowds of programmers is
> nonsense. Maybe there will be those who will just watch. Maybe there will
> be those who make their fork, but they will not make any contribution.
> No, I'm not a pessimist - I'm just a realist.
> 
> In any case, if we want to provide a Github-style interface besides to
> Cgit interface, we would definitely choose a solution that we can run on
> our servers. For example, Gitea:
> 
> https://mirror.git.trinitydesktop.org/gitea/
> 
> 
>> 3. Impose renaming  as top priority, and a split in several categories.
>> With main, of guaranteed minimum quality.
>>
> 
> As I said before: Renaming everything is one of the great challenges
> facing us. We know that this is useful as the first necessary step to
> overcome the barrier to inclusion into the distributions. However, our
> main priority is - and I can say that it will always be - to provide
> Trinity to users who use it.
> 
> Splitting code into the "first category" and "others" is nonsense.
> 
> 
>> 4. Bend over backwards, so that trinity is accepted in Debian.
>>
> 
> There is no need to waste time on this point until the renaming of
> everything will be done. Yes, it would be a nice benefit, but we can
> continue to work without it. It is simply a long-term goal.
> 
> 
>> All this, is just to increase exposire of the project.
>> You have to go, where people are.
>> This way, you get more users and devs.
>> Instead, every one here, only see's the very short term.
>> Literally, just the next patch.
>>
>> This can not be done, without some one in charge.....
>>
> 
> We are a small community. Whoever wants to become a respected member,
> others have to see the results of his work. At first I hoped you could
> learn teamwork, you could get an overview of the structure of the source
> code, you could become a useful member of the team. But the only results
> you show is just chatter.
> 
>  From your four points there is the only one who deserves effort - renaming
> everything. When I asked you to take up this task, the answer was still
> just the same chatter. You can not make any move forward only by talking.
> You will not get any respect from the community only by talking.
> 
> It only depends on you if you want to be beneficial to our community, and
> instead of talking, you will begin to devote for useful work, or if you
> just keep talking and others will ignore you more and more.
> 
> I remind you that you have not even revealed the basic good behavior to
> introduce yourself!
> 
> Cheers
> 

You aren't "deputy leader", you are the defacto leader.
You said no, and that's the end of it.
You basically said "advertising the project is worthless"