Re: [O] Offer for taking over maintainership

[Jambunathan K]

"Nicolas Richard" <address@hidden> writes:

> but you cannot make an unrealistic offer (don't tell
> me you had not foreseen the many negative responses) and then just
> somehow say "Too bad for you, I offered to save your souls and you
> refused it."

Well, I just did.  How can you openly refuse to believe what just
happened.  Wishful thinking on your part, I should say!

>
> Anyway, considering the current state of the discussion, I think
> everybody's time, including yours, is being misused
>
>> Note: Anger is futile, particularly over the internet.
>
> Sure it is ; but you do look angry.

You should come see me in my apartment, as I type these words.  No one
is having more fun than I am having right now.

> Trying to get back on the topic, IIUC you're saying that the maintainer
> should focus on code, 

(It took some effort to get people to talk, rather than just say
whatever pleases their own ears.  Sigh!)

(Code is vague.  Not just code but important code.)

Yes, do not pick low-hanging fruits.

But tackle difficult ones that no one else will work on.  Nicolas tries
to maintain low profile, but he has single handedly demonstrated that
there is no dearth of opportunities if only some thought and discretion
is exercised.  He has pulled off quite a bit.  Working on difficult
tasks has not been happening for quite some time now, IMNSHO.  I am
willing to be shown wrong.

In any (Free Software) project that I know of, the principals focus on
difficult problems.  There is a development cycle where the focus is on
high-hanging fruits.  Then there is a bug-fix cycle where the focus is
on low-hanging fruits.  One phase usually breaks the monotony of the
other.  There is a clear line that is religiously *not* breached.

I tell once again, Bastien (who calls himself and who others call the
maintainer) has made miniscule contribution to Nicolas efforts.  In the
meanwhile, he was fixing all the other things.  One can always twist the
facts to one's own advantage.  Bastien is plain wrong when he says his
Thankless job helped Nicolas or Jambunathan focus and complete their
work.  What I did with ODT exporter would have been done irrespective of
what Bastien chose to do or not do.  I will even venture to represent
Nicolas and say his framework would have sailed through irrespective of
presence or absence of Bastien.  In truth, Bastien has slowed down the
process and adoption of new exporter framework.  (I am an insider, don't
try to differ with me here.)

I am a developer and an Engineer.  I have natural dislike for what I
consider as mere posturing in others.  I don't like fudging facts to
play with people's perception.

> while "community management" (e.g. spending a great amount of time
> answering on the lists and getting thanked for it) should be in
> someone else's hand. 

This is besides the point.  You place something on the table that is
worth looking at.  This is not even a secondary or tertiary item in what
I tabled.  It's something that each member of the community has to look
at.

I am asking, why cannot people pitch in with patches or offer to write
documentation or help themselves.  Saying "I love you and hugs!", my
"Inbox is filled, Thank you!" is all good and wonderful.  But the
euphoria is plain delusional.  People say "I want the old exporter
back."  "I want documentation on new exporter." "I will not test gamma,
beta or alpha releases.  I want stable releases and I want it to work
flawlessly."  "This is broken in ox-html.el.  Even signed contributors
report a bug, fail to give an ECM or too lazy to fix what is their own
problem."  People want to be spoon fed and then want to pat themselves
on their back saying "I am a good member of community!".  This is
hypocrisy at it's worst.

Interestingly, the only people who have NOT fallen in to the trap I have
laid, are the people who I have immense respect for.  They have their
doubts and find it wise to not say it.  I have respect for sceptics but
no respect for people who are so sure of themselves.

I called the community riffraffs for a reason.  They are in truth
riffsraffs.  

It is also delusional thinking to think that a community can have a say
on who the maintainer could be.  Principals or the circumstances decide
who the maintainer is.  Riffraffs need to read up a bit on how Free
Software communities work and function.

> Is it what you meant or did I misinterpret your statements? Maybe you
> could also elaborate on why you proposed a takeover instead of
> collaborating with the current maintainer.

Not what all you hear or others write is truth.  Reader's discretion is
advised.
--