Survey finally published etc
goran at krampe.se
goran at krampe.se
Tue Jan 24 21:39:20 UTC 2006
Trying to wrap this up so that we can put it behind us (hopefully). Kiss
and make up is probably a lofty goal :), but at least we could get it
off our backs.
Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Goran -
> goran at krampe.se wrote:
> > The whole point with the current board was that we needed to "get going"
> > - and the SqF bootstrap wasn't going anywhere. Now we are getting
> > dangerously close (IMHO) to a similar fate with the upcoming election.
> I think this is at the heart of our disagreement. I do not agree that
> the "SqF bootstrap wasn't going anywhere" in a form that would require
> such drastic actions. Sure, it wasn't the fastest, but it was trying to
> get agreement, and that was part of its appeal.
Well, it is fine if you disagree with that - we are all entitled
different opinions. It is in the past anyway. I just skimmed the email
exchange over those couple of days and well, it is a lot of email and it
is hard to reconstruct all thoughts etc.
It is still very clear to me that the SqF formation was going *nowhere*
and that we felt that something needed to be done to get *something* set
up *in the meantime*. But again, who knows - perhaps SqF would have
gotten going eventually, we will never really know.
> Neither do I think that
> the election "is in danger". It may be in danger wrt your deadline but
> that was your deadline, not theirs IIRC.
We will see. Just let it be noted that I am worried. I am worried about
it getting done at all and I am worried about too few people showing up
> > If you really mean that you are positive towards the new upcoming board
> > and election, help out with it so that it turns out successful.
> I really mean that. But please keep in mind that I do have a number of
Good, then I choose to believe you.
> other things on my plate (#1 being Hedgehog right now) and will probably
> not have much spare time to spend on these issues.
Which is of course all fine.
And my humble opinion is that the people who *do* take the time for
these "community things" (and that is *free* time, not payed time)
should be respected for that and not distrusted. And this is directed to
the whole squeak-dev - not to you.
> > Well, it has been lots of water under the bridge but I still feel quite
> > uneasy about what happened and I really can't get a grip on your
> > intentions/motives anymore. Yes, this is a vague statement - but it is
> > just how I feel and I don't want to dwelve deeper into the reasons in
> > public.
> Strangely enough, this almost precisely describes my feelings towards
> the islanders group (and in particular yours truly).
Which I still don't understand. The fact remains that I have zero
economic investments in Squeak beside the fact that I have invested my
own time to know it as a tool and that I have gotten a payback in the
form of being part of a fantastic community. But if I am not mistaken
you have quite a lot of real investments "in Squeak", right?
Anyway, it is quite funny that you *still* say you distrust me/us after
all that has been done and the fact that I am stepping down and that we
are holding an election etc etc. You still think I have some dark agenda
stuck up my sleeve? :)
Oh, and btw - Dan have gotten all emails exchanged internally in the
group (and continues to do so after merging with Stephane/Noury) so if
there was any dark deeds brewing you could just ask him. :)
> Now, from my point of view, my motivations are simple: Technically, I
> need a robust basis for the work going on in Tweak/Croquet. The smaller
> the basis the better because it limits maintenance efforts. If you look
> at the work I do for the community you'll find that there is an obvious
> overlap of interests: ToolBuilder, Graphics, FFI, Compression are all
> core technologies that we use heavily in our projects and where it makes
> perfect sense to put some work in.
> In the larger picture, because of the dependency on other parts of the
> system, I am in the conservative camp - changes are generally bad since
> we have no control and little influence on what precisely happens where
> (just two days ago I got reminded again how small that influence is in
> practice). You should therefore be prepared that if I comment on such
> issues that I'll raise the conservative voice - this is part of my
> responsibility to the other projects I'm in.
I understand your POV here but I don't really understand why you say you
have "no control" and "little influence". IMHO you have lots of
influence being in the position that you are (Croquet, Tweak, Win32 VM,
Toolbuilder/Graphics etc etc) and the community listens very carefully
to whatever you have to say. And that has always included the board too.
> From the community point of view (meaning Squeak-dev community) I have
> actually very little motivations - I am not trying to achieve anything
> in particular (which may explain your vague feeling).
No, my feeling is based on earlier happenings.
> Mostly I'm just
> throwing in my $.02 for what it's worth. I do dislike the islander
> setup, I dislike the way it came about, and I will be happy to see
> something that represents the community in the best way possible.
Hehe, the election will turn out interesting then.
> If you look at what I generally do and say in light of the above I think
> you won't find many inconsistencies.
> >>>I just humbly wonder why you didn't bother to even *reply* to the survey
> >>>emails which AFAIK asked quite a few questions regarding these things.
> >>Honestly? Really, there were a couple of things. First, I'm busy.
> > Too busy to reply and say so? For two weeks?
> More for like eight weeks. And originally, like I was saying I was
> planning on writing something back. That was up until the point of
> "that" message.
You know - *noone* is so busy that it takes 8 weeks to hit reply and
type in "I am busy as hell, take a raincheck in 8 weeks?"... well,
depending on your typing speed I would estimate it to 10-15 seconds.
Probably shorter than the time to actually read the survey - which you
Anyway, I see your apology below so it's fine.
> > And what about:
> [... snip ...]
> > If that question (for example) wasn't about the future then... what?
> Yes, they are. But like I said:
> >>here, I didn't dare to speak my mind freely - simply because you
> >>promised to publish the results and if I would say what the most likely
> >>course of action is it would get me even more of a reputation of being
> >>an evil guy who wants to prevent everyone from doing anything. So none
> >>of this was really appealing to me.
> > I would like to note that the email said:
> > "If you wish to give "off the record" feedback you can do so by simply
> > separately emailing mysterious-island at discuss.squeakfoundation.org which
> > is the non public mailinglist of the Coordinators."
> Actually, I don't remember this and I probably interpreted that
> differently (e.g., as "if you have any OTHER feedback" outside of that
> survey). Sorry, my bad.
The email can be read in full at: http://swiki.krampe.se/castaways/28
> > Now there you go. I can't judge if my reminders were really *that*
> > upsetting, and IMHO the apology was pretty darn clear - but it doesn't
> > matter. Fact remains, we got ZERO replies from 5 out of 12 stakeholder
> > communities.
> Yes, and? (I'm not sure if you are trying to make an argument here - if
> you do, I don't get it)
I just mean that I found it quite depressing (lack of responses) and
that if this was because I stumbled with the words in the second
reminder sent out after 13 days (and then apologized) then I don't think
*that* is a fair reason for not giving any reply at all.
Whatever - feel free to hang me out as the bad guy for that single
sentence. I mean, hey, it is not like I had *anything* better to do than
to hunt down contact persons, explain what we wanted with them, answer
questions about that, get confirmations that they wanted the role, craft
a survey, get agreement on the survey with the others on the board, send
it out, send out a small correction, send out reminders etc etc. Hey, I
do that for fun every sunday! Bah.
> > But what is the whole point being a contact person if you don't want to
> > communicate with us? Let me quote from the email inviting you to be a
> > contact person:
> [... snip ...]
> > Now, sure - it says "there are no obligations" but it also clearly says
> > that we want to be able to send out questions etc. And no, there is
> > nothing forcing you to answer - but IMHO the least we could expect is
> > that you bother to reply.
> You know, you're right. I should have sent an email saying "thanks for
> sending this, I received it, and I may or may not reply within the time
> frame you set". I apologize for not doing that, I will definitely do it
> in the future.
> I don't think this would've changed the gist of this discussion (in
> which case we would discuss "not answering the questions" instead of
> "not answering") but I should've done it nonetheless. Sorry for that.
It would have changed quite a lot I can tell you - John replied in
exactly that way and fine, what can we do. Hey, this is btw what I sent
to John at the time:
John Maloney <jmaloney at media.mit.edu> wrote:
> I don't have time to respond.
> -- John
Do you wish to respond later? We can always include answers later on -
better than not getting them at all. :)
Since we will base our course forward on these results the sooner we get
them the more likely we will be able to take them into account.
Otherwise feel free to answer "at will" - it still serves a good purpose
showing the larger community your specific wants, thoughts and needs.
> - Andreas
More information about the Squeak-dev