Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by address@hidden)

[Janek Warchoł]

Let me write a clarification and a disclaimer. It was not the purpose of my
email to blame people. If someone (especially David) felt attacked, I
apologize. I wanted to express how I view the situation, and I may be
mistaken in my opinions. I don't claim to hold the objective truth.

czw., 6 lut 2020 o 00:32 Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>
napisał(a):

> Do you think that approaching other people with suspicion like this (i.e.
> expecting they have worst intentions, which is getting close to a
> conspiracy theory) contributes to a friendly atmosphere? I don't think so.
>

I realize you might have felt attacked, and I apologize. I should have
written "Do you think that this contributes to a friendly atmosphere? I
personally feel distrusted and unwelcome, as if I had worst intentions."

śr., 5 lut 2020 o 23:05 David Kastrup <address@hidden> napisał(a):
>
>> Uh, this was not intended as a "fence off" as much as that I considered
>> extensions of that scope and direction not a good fit for putting in the
>> core.
>>
>
> I know it's difficult for you, but please try to see the emotions here.
> Simply notice that there is a very active contributor, to whom LilyPond as
> a projects owes very much (especially when it comes to being known in
> academic circles), who helped people on the lists numerous time, and this
> contributor is sad and frustrated about his contributing experience.
> Please, don't argue - just acknowledge the fact and try to show others that
> you've acknowledged it.
>

I should have sent this privately. I apologize.


> when I tried doing things that didn't clearly align with the views of a
> person with most authority (for the last few years David has been this
> person) I had felt *unwelcome* and my personal impression was that they
> were "blocked". It was very difficult to get some things done.
>

Disclaimer: this is only *my impression*. Maybe the problem was with me.


> However, right after that the discussion became dominated by David, who
> started writing multiple long emails, which partly consisted of merit-based
> question, partly of his predictions "what will happen if" (which can be
> useful, but only to certain extent) and partly of suspicions of something
> close to a conspiracy theory.
>

David, I tried to look from your perspective and realized that it was a
natural reaction for you to try defending yourself (even if our goal was
not to attack you). I apologize for not trying harder to empathize with
you. I am sorry that my proposal of introducing Code of Conduct made you
feel attacked.

I still think that the discussion gets a bit unmanageable, but it's rather
an unfortunate side-effect.

If this was a code patch, the result would be that either a) I would have
> to spend countless hours addressing his concerns rather than actually
> implementing a solution or b) if I tried to ignore the ones that, according
> to my best knowledge, were insignificant, David would object and probably
> reject the patch.
>

Again, this is only *my impression*. Maybe my patches were just shitty.

It's similar with other initiatives. My impression of LilyPond community is
> that the decisions are "made" on the basis of who writes the longest / the
> most emails. This person is David, and he's unbeatable at that. But there
> is only one David (well, one David K), and if he spends all his time
> writing emails, he won't have much time left for writing code - while
> people who think differently won't be able to get through because they
> don't have so much time for writing emails. That is, in my opinion, one of
> the major reasons for development slowdown, and contributor frustration
> (apart from the fact that the process is complicated).
>

I *definitely* don't mean to say that David intentionally tries to win
arguments by writing long emails.
I *do* mean that I have no idea how to handle the amount of email involved
when communicating with David in the time that I have.

I hope we can find a way to communicate better, and I'll try to be more
thoughtful next time.
Janek

>