[Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
walter.bender at gmail.com
Tue Oct 29 12:00:09 EDT 2013
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:01 PM, David Farning
<dfarning at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
> participating on this thread.
> The three things I am going to takeway from the the thread are:
> 1. Jame's point about my position about not representing the median.
> Due to my history and role in the ecosystem, I have upset some
> apple-carts :(
> 2. Martin's point about the right hand not always being aware of what
> the left hand is doing. This unfortunately seems to happen too
> 3. Finally, and most importantly, Daniel's point about getting back
> to the business of improving Sugar.
> My proposal is that Activity Central make the next step of funding two
> developers to work on HTML5 and JS. If we can find a mutually
> beneficial relationship around this, we can see how we can expand the
> relationship in the future.
> Seem reasonable?
Proposals aside (of course more eyes and hands would be appreciated)
there is still the underlying issue of mistrust that you have raised.
I think it is important that we clear the air and I think it is not
unreasonable to ask you to be specific about your perceptions that
somehow Sugar Labs is not acting in a transparent manner.
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 29 October 2013 01:14, David Farning <dfarning at activitycentral.com>
>>> As two Data points:
>>> In a private conversation with an Association employee they told me
>>> that they conciser Activity Central a competitor because Activity
>>> Central increased deployments expectations. Their strategy with regard
>>> to Activity Central was to _not_ accept patches upstream with the goal
>>> of causing Activity Central and Dextrose to collapse under its their
>>> weight. As it was private conversation I am not sure how widely spread
>>> the opinion was held.
>> The patch queue is currently empty. In the last six months only one patchset
>> was rejected. It was by Activity Central and it was rejected by me (not an
>> OLPC employee) for purely technical reasons. The proof being that the same
>> patchset landed after being cleaned up and resubmitted properly by another
>> Activity Central developer.
>> More in general, no single developer is in charge of patch reviewing, OLPC
>> couldn't keep code out of the tree for non-technical reason even if they
>> wanted to. More specifically the ability to approve patches was offered to
>> one Activity Central developer, which never used it.
>>> Recently there was a call for help testing HTML5 and JS. Two
>>> developers Code and Roger have been writing proof of concept
>>> activities. They have been receiving extensive off-list help getting
>>> started. But, interestingly, their on-list request for clarification
>>> about how to test datastore was met with silence.
>> Mailing list posts going unanswered isn't really uncommon in free software
>> projects. But most of the time it just means that no one knows the answer or
>> everyone is too busy.
>> Only me and Manuel are usually answering about HTML5. I have not answered
>> because... gmail put those messages in my spam folder, sigh! Most likely the
>> same happened to Manuel or he has been busy. (I need to take some sleep now
>> but I'll try to answer asap).
> David Farning
> Activity Central: http://www.activitycentral.com
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
More information about the Devel