Re: [Freemarker-devel] Re: New server for freemarker.org?

[Jonathan R. <re...@te...>]

Daniel Dekany wrote:
> Friday, June 24, 2005, 5:38:08 PM, Patrick Lightbody wrote:
> 
> 
>>As one of the primary drivers behind OpenSymphony, I can say that we
>>are definitely interested in FreeMarker joining our team. However,
>>certain expectations have to be stated very clearly up front. Of
>>course, we know these things take time and don't expect them to happen
>>over night.
>>
>>It would be expected that "freemarker.org" no longer exist as its own
>>website, but rather would simply point to the FreeMarker website on
>>the OpenSymphony server. This is important to establish that
>>FreeMarker is now an OpenSymphony-branded project. On top of that, our
>>website is driven by a common layout and flow, so the site would have
>>to conform to that. It is not very strict, so I don't imagine you'd
>>have many problems with that.
> 
> 
> OK as far as I'm concerned. Attila, Jonathan?

Well, this above point I just take as a given -- assuming that this 
really were to happen. Let's not start talking about this as if it's a 
done deal or something.

It's *extremely* hypothetical right now.

> 
> 
>>It would also be expected that your build system eventually gets
>>modified to work from the OpenSymphony Common Build. This is required
>>to ensure that the website is updated automatically, that tests are
>>built after every check in, and that maven and ivy artifact
>>repositories are automatically populated. On top of that, it will
>>actually help streamline your release process.
> 
> 
> Sure... no problem. Right guys? 

Probably, but I am not 100% sure. I don't know the implications of the 
maven and ivy things. Streamlining the release process sounds good. Our 
project could do with better processes generally, I'm sure. OTOH, it 
hopefully wouldn't get too bureaucratic or whatever.

> (Except that who will do it, because
> everybody hates such build-script/do-release/other-administrative-crap
> things... :))

Well, I'd have to think that the OS people would give us some helping 
hand on converting over to their systems. They're the ones familiar with it.

> 
> 
>>Finally, it should be understood that OpenSymphony doesn't not dictate
>>the specific directions that each project should go. That is always
>>left up to the project owners. However, OpenSymphony does have certain
>>standards that must be met, such as good documentation, but FreeMarker
>>already has that. The only way the project owner of OSCache can shape
>>the direction of WebWork is by getting involved, submitting patches,
>>and doing what every other developer must do to contribute.

I'm wondering, this reference to OSCache above.... is the above text a 
copy-paste-modify from previous correspondence with those people before 
they became part of OS? (Not an accusation. Just curious. It makes sense 
to reuse the same text in the same context.... :-))

>>
>>However, the OpenSymphony team (made up of the project leaders of each
>>project plus a few other key individuals) does expect participation in
>>group-wide topics, such as suggestions on how to improve the Common
>>Build or how we might make the website easier to navigate. We only
>>want people in the OpenSymphony team that are fully committed to
>>working together; people who just create conflict have no place here.
> 
> 
> Well you are about invoking at least one social monster idiot with
> FreeMarker... ;)

Well, you may create conflict sometimes, but you're not someone who 
"_just_ creates conflict". You contribute a lot and do get down and so 
some hard work even.

> I already have an advice. I wanted to see what Issue
> tracker do you provide (Jira it seems, cool), so I tried to report a WW
> bug... it was 2 clicks -- with second link being far not easy to see,
> and comes together with a lot of text that most user won't read for sure
> -- just to face with screen that tells me that I have to register and
> log in... No way. You should provide a glaring link like "REPORT A BUG",
> which should *immediately* lead to a page where the user can start to
> type the bug description. Or if you have a lot of users and thus it
> would result on too many duplicates (I doubt, but I don't know...) then
> to the page where he can immediately search or start a new report with
> one more click. My (limited) personal experience is that users are damn
> lazy to report bugs. Especially small ones (like typos). And I hate
> bugs, so I want them to die, at least in my project (like in FMPP all
> pages have a bug reporting link on its footer, and with a image of an
> impaled bug, just to be more apparent).
> 
> 
>>The underlying theme is that joining OpenSymphony is more than just
>>using our servers. You would be joining a group of project owners that
>>all wish to continue to improve the process of developing Open Source
>>software under the OpenSymphony banner. We have to work together to do
>>this, and we have to be courteous as well as aggressive in our goals.

Well, my honest reaction to this is that it's hard to know exactly what 
this means in practice. It should go without saying that people should 
not be gratuitously rude and insensitive to one another. OTOH, sometimes 
a given thing needs to be said, even if it is potentially unpleasant. So 
one class of situation to consider is the one where there is a choice 
between avoiding unpleasantness at all costs and saying what needs to be 
said. In such cases, it really has to be the latter. If something has to 
be said, it has to be said. Now, okay, if something potentially 
aggravating or unpleasant has to be said (like so-and-so's idea or their 
code kinda sucks) it is better to couch it in the most diplomatic, 
considerate way possible.... BUT can one really expect a bunch of tech 
geeks to always be particularly diplomatic or considerate??? And, in any 
case, do you want to discourage spirited, even heated, technical debate?

Well, basically, that's me thinking out loud. I mean, I would feel more 
comfortable with somebody just saying: "Look, we foster a culture of 
brutal honesty, and people who get involved in this have to understand 
that this is the way it is. Our goal is technical excellence; it is not 
to stroke one another's egos. HOWEVER, that said, do understand that our 
community does not encourage or accept *gratuitously* rude, insensitive, 
boorish behavior. Certainly, in cases that cross that line, we'll take 
it up with the person. We are confident that, in most such cases, things 
can be resolved, since usually the case is that a person did not realize 
that what they said could be construed as insulting..."

If the VSS thing goes ahead, I would state things more on those lines.

> 
> 
> Jonathan... "aggressive". It's for you! Maybe you can even have jobs
> like ravage small villages and like... :)
> 

Well, I earlier said that the Visigoths reference in VSS had this 
barbarian ring to it... rape and pillage... Not that one should think 
that we Visigoths are such bad people. You have to understand that, back 
in those days, we didn't have internet or DVD or nintendo... so, you 
know.... you had to do something to pass the time... ;-)

> 
>>I think FreeMarker would be an excellent candidate to join
>>OpenSymphony if the FM team is agreeable to these conditions. And
>>remember, these conditions have only come about as a result of other
>>project leaders (Quartz, OSWorkflow, WebWork, etc) working together to
>>improve the process.
> 
> 
> Sure... that's the interest of each individual projects after all.
> 
> (One thing I wonder about is to wait for FM 3.0 with the (possible)
> adoption. I mean, if your projects are really quality ones, not just
> they meant to be (I think it's very hard to ensure in practice... do you
> kick projects if they are not good enough or?), then maybe you don't
> want a project that kill break BC with it's next release after
> adoption...)

Well, let's not jump to any immediate conclusions about any of this... :-)

JR

> 
> 
>>Patrick
> 
>