You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@calcite.apache.org by Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> on 2021/12/22 17:45:33 UTC
[DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Hey community, I need your help. You might have noticed that Vladimir
and I are fighting it out in a long email thread [1].
I find it stressful and time-consuming to be involved in threads such
as this with Vladimir. And I find myself taking out my frustrations on
my family. I should not have to go through this.
Ten years ago Ceki Gülcü, founder of Log4j, wrote a blog post on why
he left Apache [2]. It's a great post, and you should read it.
Vladimir himself has cited it in other Apache threads recently,
although he probably identifies with different personas in the post
than I do.
One of the themes of the blog post is that the community must step in
and enforce culture, and not give trolls the benefit of the doubt.
Read the article, and having read it, if you agree, step up.
Julian
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjytkp4obzh8lnn686cwlb87y07nq6f6
[2] http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
Re: [DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Posted by JiaTao Tao <ta...@gmail.com>.
About maven, I still miss it.
Arguing is pointless
If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail
Regards!
Aron Tao
Vladimir Sitnikov <si...@gmail.com> 于2021年12月23日周四 07:10写道：
> >[2]
> http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
>
> ^^ It is a must-read indeed.
> I wish I read it much earlier than a week ago.
>
> Julian, as I see you did not reply to [1]. It implies you ignore my
> suggestions in that thread, or you think they are worse than what you
> suggest.
>
> Jokes aside, I see no way how "manual updates of the latest tested java in
> all the markdown files" (Julian's idea) could win over "single place to
> declare the version and let the machine do the substitution in all the .md
> files" (my idea).
> Just in case, Julian never asked me if I would volunteer implementing the
> autoreplacer.
>
> Julian, I was scared you quit, and my last hope to heal the community was
> to organize a call to discuss Ceki's story and try to avoid it in Calcite.
>
> I quit as I see there's an impedance mismatch.
>
> Thank you for inviting me, that was a nice experience.
> I learned a lot during these years.
>
> I would like to thank Stamatis a lot as he has done a lot for improving the
> community via meetups, nominating committers, and helping others to get out
> of the conflicts.
>
> The thing I dislike in Calcite community the most
> is that **very** often people start questioning (or even reject) ideas,
> they provide no alternatives, and they do not seem to listen.
> I agree it is wise to give every idea -100 points at the beginning, and
> then decide if the benefits make the net score positive.
> However, the community seem to ignore benefits.
>
> I absolutely do not want to hear risks like "oh, adding a new language is a
> serious committment, so we should not add X" or "jira is fine, no changes
> please".
> Those are generic risks, and I believe they add no value to the
> conversations.
>
> What scares me A LOT is that I see a very similar pattern in JMeter
> community (I'm a member of PMC there), however, the number of active
> contributors is way less than in Calcite, so the friction is way less.
>
> Do we really need to discuss the upgrade of junit4 to junit5?
> Do we really need to discuss adding fuzzing tests (e.g. like in my
> suggestion to use randomized CI matrix)?
> Hey, fuzzing is one of the key testing approaches nowadays. Yet Calcite
> community rejects it and they fear that random failures are bad.
> Come on. You can do better.
>
> Do we even need to discuss that the release notes should be autogenerated
> (see release drafter)?
> In my opinion, there's nothing to discuss and nothing to object, and the
> only question can be "who volunteers" doing that. I often implemented those
> types of changes, yet the discussions were far from welcoming.
>
> Of course, the experience was not bad every day.
> For instance, "Maven -> Gradle" migration got a lot of positive feedback
> immediately.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2905
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/jw3ovlv5tp3vjcp0o5ztcv8yrzd2okl9
> ^^ this was a joy
>
> However, as I presented the first prototype, I got a really surprising
> response:
> "This is not an improvement because it adds a new Kotlin language in a form
> of .kts files"
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/plb3rjypqrwo34qr3o2fdh2qqofx04y9
> ^^ this is not fun.
> I know what I am doing. I am sure the scripts I added are readable and
> understandable.
> I know I use up-to-date approaches.
> Please, what is the reason to mention a generic risk of "adding a new
> language"?
>
> -----
>
> Later I rolled @nullable annotations via Checkerframework
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4199
>
> I suggest everybody take a break, think for a couple of seconds and decide
> if @nullable annotations in Calcite code
> turned out to be helpful or unhelpful (for both developing Calcite, and
> using Calcite).
>
> From my point of view, it was super frustrating to receive feedback like in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/tyxqydxwbt6lkokgobjok083nxqjrhlx
> >Vladimir has been trying to fix things that aren’t broken
>
> My bad I did not try contacting Julian directly to align approaches to
> commits, reviews and broken/nonbroken things.
>
> Of course, if you consider @nullability annotations harmful and/or useless,
> all of them can be removed in a matter of seconds (remove annotations; make
> requireNonNull methods trivial and call "inline method in IDEA"; optimize
> imports; etc)
>
> Of course, it would be better to gradually migrate to Kotlin (it does not
> require lengthy checkerframework verifier), however I just assumed the idea
> would be killed no matter what.
> For instance, Kotlin has the official style guide, so it makes many
> checkstyle verifications obsolete == much less failures like "you missed a
> space after comma".
>
> ----
>
> Recently I suggested "migrating to GitHub Issues".
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/m2h13v2p7kowglj73qr4sqn1c3pm8tlq
>
> Technically speaking, the results in the DISCUSS thread were not that bad
> +1 Vladimir Sitnikov
> +0.5 Zhe Hu
> +0.5 Jing Zhang
> +1 Chunwei Lei
> +0 Michael Mior
> -0 Josh Elser
> (no vote) Stamatis Zampetakis
> -0.47 Jacques Nadeau
> (no vote, yet the tone was negative) Julian Hyde
>
> The VOTE thread was like "everybody rejects":
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/51dznc2b0yy5sncp56hv3r71nmhtwq9v
> +1 Vladimir Sitnikov
> -1 Julian Hyde
> -1 Chunwei Lei
> -1 Ruben Q L
>
> I absolutely did not care about the exact scores. I was assuming everybody
> would +1 and we could plan the migration.
> What I dislike is community resists just because they need nothing more
> than JIRA.
>
> Hey, moving issues to GitHub would make task tracking, commenting, release
> management, linking, review, and so on much easier to do.
> It is just nonsense to reject an opportunity when somebody suggests
> improving the workflow.
>
> If the only thing you have is a jira-horse, you would never ask for an
> automobile.
>
> Apparently, the community does not want me or my ideas.
>
> Have great holidays.
> Sorry for the inconvenience.
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Posted by Vladimir Sitnikov <si...@gmail.com>.
>[2]
http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
^^ It is a must-read indeed.
I wish I read it much earlier than a week ago.
Julian, as I see you did not reply to [1]. It implies you ignore my
suggestions in that thread, or you think they are worse than what you
suggest.
Jokes aside, I see no way how "manual updates of the latest tested java in
all the markdown files" (Julian's idea) could win over "single place to
declare the version and let the machine do the substitution in all the .md
files" (my idea).
Just in case, Julian never asked me if I would volunteer implementing the
autoreplacer.
Julian, I was scared you quit, and my last hope to heal the community was
to organize a call to discuss Ceki's story and try to avoid it in Calcite.
I quit as I see there's an impedance mismatch.
Thank you for inviting me, that was a nice experience.
I learned a lot during these years.
I would like to thank Stamatis a lot as he has done a lot for improving the
community via meetups, nominating committers, and helping others to get out
of the conflicts.
The thing I dislike in Calcite community the most
is that **very** often people start questioning (or even reject) ideas,
they provide no alternatives, and they do not seem to listen.
I agree it is wise to give every idea -100 points at the beginning, and
then decide if the benefits make the net score positive.
However, the community seem to ignore benefits.
I absolutely do not want to hear risks like "oh, adding a new language is a
serious committment, so we should not add X" or "jira is fine, no changes
please".
Those are generic risks, and I believe they add no value to the
conversations.
What scares me A LOT is that I see a very similar pattern in JMeter
community (I'm a member of PMC there), however, the number of active
contributors is way less than in Calcite, so the friction is way less.
Do we really need to discuss the upgrade of junit4 to junit5?
Do we really need to discuss adding fuzzing tests (e.g. like in my
suggestion to use randomized CI matrix)?
Hey, fuzzing is one of the key testing approaches nowadays. Yet Calcite
community rejects it and they fear that random failures are bad.
Come on. You can do better.
Do we even need to discuss that the release notes should be autogenerated
(see release drafter)?
In my opinion, there's nothing to discuss and nothing to object, and the
only question can be "who volunteers" doing that. I often implemented those
types of changes, yet the discussions were far from welcoming.
Of course, the experience was not bad every day.
For instance, "Maven -> Gradle" migration got a lot of positive feedback
immediately.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2905
https://lists.apache.org/thread/jw3ovlv5tp3vjcp0o5ztcv8yrzd2okl9
^^ this was a joy
However, as I presented the first prototype, I got a really surprising
response:
"This is not an improvement because it adds a new Kotlin language in a form
of .kts files"
https://lists.apache.org/thread/plb3rjypqrwo34qr3o2fdh2qqofx04y9
^^ this is not fun.
I know what I am doing. I am sure the scripts I added are readable and
understandable.
I know I use up-to-date approaches.
Please, what is the reason to mention a generic risk of "adding a new
language"?
-----
Later I rolled @nullable annotations via Checkerframework
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4199
I suggest everybody take a break, think for a couple of seconds and decide
if @nullable annotations in Calcite code
turned out to be helpful or unhelpful (for both developing Calcite, and
using Calcite).
From my point of view, it was super frustrating to receive feedback like in
https://lists.apache.org/thread/tyxqydxwbt6lkokgobjok083nxqjrhlx
>Vladimir has been trying to fix things that aren’t broken
My bad I did not try contacting Julian directly to align approaches to
commits, reviews and broken/nonbroken things.
Of course, if you consider @nullability annotations harmful and/or useless,
all of them can be removed in a matter of seconds (remove annotations; make
requireNonNull methods trivial and call "inline method in IDEA"; optimize
imports; etc)
Of course, it would be better to gradually migrate to Kotlin (it does not
require lengthy checkerframework verifier), however I just assumed the idea
would be killed no matter what.
For instance, Kotlin has the official style guide, so it makes many
checkstyle verifications obsolete == much less failures like "you missed a
space after comma".
----
Recently I suggested "migrating to GitHub Issues".
https://lists.apache.org/thread/m2h13v2p7kowglj73qr4sqn1c3pm8tlq
Technically speaking, the results in the DISCUSS thread were not that bad
+1 Vladimir Sitnikov
+0.5 Zhe Hu
+0.5 Jing Zhang
+1 Chunwei Lei
+0 Michael Mior
-0 Josh Elser
(no vote) Stamatis Zampetakis
-0.47 Jacques Nadeau
(no vote, yet the tone was negative) Julian Hyde
The VOTE thread was like "everybody rejects":
https://lists.apache.org/thread/51dznc2b0yy5sncp56hv3r71nmhtwq9v
+1 Vladimir Sitnikov
-1 Julian Hyde
-1 Chunwei Lei
-1 Ruben Q L
I absolutely did not care about the exact scores. I was assuming everybody
would +1 and we could plan the migration.
What I dislike is community resists just because they need nothing more
than JIRA.
Hey, moving issues to GitHub would make task tracking, commenting, release
management, linking, review, and so on much easier to do.
It is just nonsense to reject an opportunity when somebody suggests
improving the workflow.
If the only thing you have is a jira-horse, you would never ask for an
automobile.
Apparently, the community does not want me or my ideas.
Have great holidays.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Re: [DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Posted by Alessandro Solimando <al...@gmail.com>.
Dear Calciters,
it is indeed a hard conversation to reply to, but I really like this
community, and I feel that the largest possible participation to this
discussion is needed, I strongly encourage others to chime in as well, even
if they are mostly readers of the ML.
I think that Jacques summarised pretty well the issues and the possible
solutions, I won't reiterate on that but try to add what I think could be
missing.
IMO most of the issues come from a constant tension between people which
are more prone to changes, and others that are more risk averse (force of
habit, personal attitude, day job-related responsibilities, etc.).
Orthogonal to that, there are objective benefits/risks and totally
subjective ones. We are all biassed in one way or another, but we should
always try to distinguish between the two, and try to be honest with
ourselves in the first place. Compromise is key to any successful
relationship and community, we should never forget that.
Decisions are not set in stone either, in some moments we might try a way
and go back to where we were, or maybe we turn a proposal down now, and we
reconsider it later on (sometimes people just need to digest things).
I know it's easy to identify oneself fully into a single persona from a
post like that, but reality is never black or white, the truth is we are
more often than not on one of the two sides depending on the situation, we
all make mistakes, we all have our limits.
Last but not least, the aforementioned problems have been there already for
quite some time, but I think we are also living in highly stressful times
due to the pandemics, which is affecting us in so many ways, directly or
indirectly. Now more than ever we should be really careful with the way we
convey our messages, and we should strive to be even more emphatic than
ever. There are a lot of people in real pain out there, and forcibly we
must have our share of them as well in our community here.
Just a last word to Julian and Vladimir: you are both very much appreciated
and respected in this community, your work too, your commitment and
dedication are a source of inspiration for many of us, I have personally
learned a lot by reading your comments and from our interactions, I will
always be grateful to you for that. It would be really sad to see any of
you go, from both a professional but also a personal standpoint, but I
value mental health very much and I would understand if you decide
otherwise and wish you all the best.
Best regards,
Alessandro
On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 at 03:21, Albert <zi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I echo Jacques’ nice and decent comments on this.
>
> *"""*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *- I think Julian and Vladimir are far and above the most
> prolificcontributors on the project (by any measure I can use: code,
> commits, emailresponses, longevity, consistency, releases, etc). [3]- I
> think Julian and Vladimir typically have the strongest opinions. (Thisis
> pretty standard, the most prolific contributors typically have thestrongest
> opinions.)- I think we have a general challenge around power asymmetry
> (people withpower aren't always aware of how this power influences
> others).- I think Julian and Vladimir are the two project titans. People
> frequentlydefer to them. When they go "mano a mano", it is challenging as
> there isless deference and more conflict. It also can devolve.*
> *"""*
>
> I was scared that either Vladimir or Julian quit. Both gave a lot of help
> to me when I contributed.
>
> To be honest I wasn't expecting
> Julian's hard time on the friction with Vladimir, I always treated it as an
> example of different opinions
> co-exist within a community, and sometimes I even talk about it as
> illustrations.
> Obviously I didn't grasp the sentiments underneath.
>
> But, there should be nothing personal after all. let's not forget the goal
> first "community over code"
>
> it's probably worth going through the friction items since Vladimir feels
> *"Apparently, the community does not want me or my ideas."*
>
> - maven to gradle
> +1, I'm not familiar with kotlin or gradle, it works and things seem
> organized better than before
> - fuzzing tests
> +1, I mean I probably have problems maintaining them, but I feel this is
> the correct thing to do.
> - checker framework
> +1, also new stuff for me, but I hate nulls
> - migrating off jira
> +0, I kind of understand the eagerness of vladimir trying to improve
> something, but I also feel JIRA works fine.
> - auto update release notes
> +1, no reason to object to automating routines for everyone because of
> human mistakes.
> With that said we don't have one at hand, so following the procedure for
> this time is a workaround.
>
> Thoughts from different perspectives are good, yet they are challenging to
> accept.
> we should have focused more on the facts of the issues but usually we melt
> into the sentiments underneath the wordings.
>
> All in all, the community can't afford to lose any of you two Julian and
> Vladimir.
> Have great holidays.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 4:29 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > This is a hard message to respond to. Hopefully my comments will reduce
> the
> > friction for others to share their own observations. Something that I
> will
> > reiterate here is that Julian posted this on a public forum which is a
> > request to not only get feedback from committers and PMC members but the
> > community at large. To help facilitate this, I would suggest that more
> > active project members only make a single response to this to allow
> "space"
> > for others to provide their feedback.
> >
> > Firstly, at least for me, it is a hard time of year to have this kind of
> > nuanced & sensitive conversation since I'm doing a lot of holiday family
> > stuff in the coming weeks.
> >
> > Secondly, having recently re-engaged in this project, I've written
> several
> > emails in a similar vein to Julian's and then each time decided not to
> send
> > it. If I felt like saying this multiple times and Julian sat down and
> > actually sent it, I would guess that others had similar
> questions/concerns.
> >
> > ## General observations:
> > - I think Julian and Vladimir are far and above the most prolific
> > contributors on the project (by any measure I can use: code, commits,
> email
> > responses, longevity, consistency, releases, etc). [3]
> > - I think Julian and Vladimir typically have the strongest opinions.
> (This
> > is pretty standard, the most prolific contributors typically have the
> > strongest opinions.)
> > - I think we have a general challenge around power asymmetry (people with
> > power aren't always aware of how this power influences others).
> > - I think Julian and Vladimir are the two project titans. People
> frequently
> > defer to them. When they go "mano a mano", it is challenging as there is
> > less deference and more conflict. It also can devolve.
> >
> > ## Challenging Behaviors
> > I see a few specific patterns occur frequently that I think are
> challenging
> > and we should strive to correct. These include:
> >
> > 1. Presenting traditions, personal preferences or opinions as "rules".
> [2]
> > 2. Being a dog with a bone (responding quickly and repeatedly to everyone
> > who has a differing opinion).
> > 3. General disrespectfulness (dismissive of others' perspective and/or
> > opinions, condescending behavior, unilateral action).
> >
> > I think all three of these behaviors are net-negative for the community.
> >
> > ## Goals
> > I think a few of things would help mitigate these challenges:
> >
> > A. For people in power, remember that your opinions are outsized. Apply
> > them only where you think it is absolutely critical to the overall health
> > of the community. You may have strong opinions about simple things. Do
> your
> > best to ignore these opinions because enforcing them only goes to
> > further solidify the asymmetric nature of your relationship.
> > B. For people in power, try to be the last to express an opinion as
> opposed
> > to the first or most frequent. For "opinion-type" threads, you should
> > strive to be a small minority of the total messages. If you find yourself
> > responding to every other sender, you're probably abusing your power.
> > C. For everyone, call out behavior that you think violates the norms of
> the
> > community you want to be a part of.
> >
> > All three of these goals are very hard to accomplish. A&B rely on
> > self-reflection (hard). C relies on those with less authority calling out
> > those with more authority (very hard).
> >
> > To share my personal self-reflection: I'll admit to having done #2 a
> couple
> > of times. I also admit that I frequently fail to call out all three
> > challenging behaviors when I see others exhibit them. The experience of
> > these behaviors has substantially reduced my interest/effort to
> contribute
> > to the project both recently and at several times in years past. I will
> do
> > my best to avoid the 1/2/3 behaviors and follow the A/B/C goals.
> >
> > As I said at the top, I think it is important to leave space for others
> to
> > respond and will hold off responding more to this thread. My ask to
> others
> > would be to do your best at the goals I outlined as A,B and C above.
> >
> > [1] Authority here is meant as karma around contribution, not formal
> Apache
> > authority.
> > [2] A challenging version of this frequently happens when someone "in
> > power" is trying to provide feedback to someone "without power". What a
> > person "in power" may intend as help or ideation may be interpreted as
> > demand by the person "without power". Karmic authority in a community
> like
> > Calcite can frequently approximate power.
> > [3] While they are the top two contributors, it would be unfair to say
> they
> > were equal in their scale of contribution and I don't mean to imply such.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 9:45 AM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hey community, I need your help. You might have noticed that Vladimir
> > > and I are fighting it out in a long email thread [1].
> > >
> > > I find it stressful and time-consuming to be involved in threads such
> > > as this with Vladimir. And I find myself taking out my frustrations on
> > > my family. I should not have to go through this.
> > >
> > > Ten years ago Ceki Gülcü, founder of Log4j, wrote a blog post on why
> > > he left Apache [2]. It's a great post, and you should read it.
> > > Vladimir himself has cited it in other Apache threads recently,
> > > although he probably identifies with different personas in the post
> > > than I do.
> > >
> > > One of the themes of the blog post is that the community must step in
> > > and enforce culture, and not give trolls the benefit of the doubt.
> > >
> > > Read the article, and having read it, if you agree, step up.
> > >
> > > Julian
> > >
> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjytkp4obzh8lnn686cwlb87y07nq6f6
> > >
> > > [2]
> > >
> >
> http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> no mistakes
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Posted by Albert <zi...@gmail.com>.
I echo Jacques’ nice and decent comments on this.
*"""*
*- I think Julian and Vladimir are far and above the most
prolificcontributors on the project (by any measure I can use: code,
commits, emailresponses, longevity, consistency, releases, etc). [3]- I
think Julian and Vladimir typically have the strongest opinions. (Thisis
pretty standard, the most prolific contributors typically have thestrongest
opinions.)- I think we have a general challenge around power asymmetry
(people withpower aren't always aware of how this power influences
others).- I think Julian and Vladimir are the two project titans. People
frequentlydefer to them. When they go "mano a mano", it is challenging as
there isless deference and more conflict. It also can devolve.*
*"""*
I was scared that either Vladimir or Julian quit. Both gave a lot of help
to me when I contributed.
To be honest I wasn't expecting
Julian's hard time on the friction with Vladimir, I always treated it as an
example of different opinions
co-exist within a community, and sometimes I even talk about it as
illustrations.
Obviously I didn't grasp the sentiments underneath.
But, there should be nothing personal after all. let's not forget the goal
first "community over code"
it's probably worth going through the friction items since Vladimir feels
*"Apparently, the community does not want me or my ideas."*
- maven to gradle
+1, I'm not familiar with kotlin or gradle, it works and things seem
organized better than before
- fuzzing tests
+1, I mean I probably have problems maintaining them, but I feel this is
the correct thing to do.
- checker framework
+1, also new stuff for me, but I hate nulls
- migrating off jira
+0, I kind of understand the eagerness of vladimir trying to improve
something, but I also feel JIRA works fine.
- auto update release notes
+1, no reason to object to automating routines for everyone because of
human mistakes.
With that said we don't have one at hand, so following the procedure for
this time is a workaround.
Thoughts from different perspectives are good, yet they are challenging to
accept.
we should have focused more on the facts of the issues but usually we melt
into the sentiments underneath the wordings.
All in all, the community can't afford to lose any of you two Julian and
Vladimir.
Have great holidays.
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 4:29 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> This is a hard message to respond to. Hopefully my comments will reduce the
> friction for others to share their own observations. Something that I will
> reiterate here is that Julian posted this on a public forum which is a
> request to not only get feedback from committers and PMC members but the
> community at large. To help facilitate this, I would suggest that more
> active project members only make a single response to this to allow "space"
> for others to provide their feedback.
>
> Firstly, at least for me, it is a hard time of year to have this kind of
> nuanced & sensitive conversation since I'm doing a lot of holiday family
> stuff in the coming weeks.
>
> Secondly, having recently re-engaged in this project, I've written several
> emails in a similar vein to Julian's and then each time decided not to send
> it. If I felt like saying this multiple times and Julian sat down and
> actually sent it, I would guess that others had similar questions/concerns.
>
> ## General observations:
> - I think Julian and Vladimir are far and above the most prolific
> contributors on the project (by any measure I can use: code, commits, email
> responses, longevity, consistency, releases, etc). [3]
> - I think Julian and Vladimir typically have the strongest opinions. (This
> is pretty standard, the most prolific contributors typically have the
> strongest opinions.)
> - I think we have a general challenge around power asymmetry (people with
> power aren't always aware of how this power influences others).
> - I think Julian and Vladimir are the two project titans. People frequently
> defer to them. When they go "mano a mano", it is challenging as there is
> less deference and more conflict. It also can devolve.
>
> ## Challenging Behaviors
> I see a few specific patterns occur frequently that I think are challenging
> and we should strive to correct. These include:
>
> 1. Presenting traditions, personal preferences or opinions as "rules". [2]
> 2. Being a dog with a bone (responding quickly and repeatedly to everyone
> who has a differing opinion).
> 3. General disrespectfulness (dismissive of others' perspective and/or
> opinions, condescending behavior, unilateral action).
>
> I think all three of these behaviors are net-negative for the community.
>
> ## Goals
> I think a few of things would help mitigate these challenges:
>
> A. For people in power, remember that your opinions are outsized. Apply
> them only where you think it is absolutely critical to the overall health
> of the community. You may have strong opinions about simple things. Do your
> best to ignore these opinions because enforcing them only goes to
> further solidify the asymmetric nature of your relationship.
> B. For people in power, try to be the last to express an opinion as opposed
> to the first or most frequent. For "opinion-type" threads, you should
> strive to be a small minority of the total messages. If you find yourself
> responding to every other sender, you're probably abusing your power.
> C. For everyone, call out behavior that you think violates the norms of the
> community you want to be a part of.
>
> All three of these goals are very hard to accomplish. A&B rely on
> self-reflection (hard). C relies on those with less authority calling out
> those with more authority (very hard).
>
> To share my personal self-reflection: I'll admit to having done #2 a couple
> of times. I also admit that I frequently fail to call out all three
> challenging behaviors when I see others exhibit them. The experience of
> these behaviors has substantially reduced my interest/effort to contribute
> to the project both recently and at several times in years past. I will do
> my best to avoid the 1/2/3 behaviors and follow the A/B/C goals.
>
> As I said at the top, I think it is important to leave space for others to
> respond and will hold off responding more to this thread. My ask to others
> would be to do your best at the goals I outlined as A,B and C above.
>
> [1] Authority here is meant as karma around contribution, not formal Apache
> authority.
> [2] A challenging version of this frequently happens when someone "in
> power" is trying to provide feedback to someone "without power". What a
> person "in power" may intend as help or ideation may be interpreted as
> demand by the person "without power". Karmic authority in a community like
> Calcite can frequently approximate power.
> [3] While they are the top two contributors, it would be unfair to say they
> were equal in their scale of contribution and I don't mean to imply such.
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 9:45 AM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hey community, I need your help. You might have noticed that Vladimir
> > and I are fighting it out in a long email thread [1].
> >
> > I find it stressful and time-consuming to be involved in threads such
> > as this with Vladimir. And I find myself taking out my frustrations on
> > my family. I should not have to go through this.
> >
> > Ten years ago Ceki Gülcü, founder of Log4j, wrote a blog post on why
> > he left Apache [2]. It's a great post, and you should read it.
> > Vladimir himself has cited it in other Apache threads recently,
> > although he probably identifies with different personas in the post
> > than I do.
> >
> > One of the themes of the blog post is that the community must step in
> > and enforce culture, and not give trolls the benefit of the doubt.
> >
> > Read the article, and having read it, if you agree, step up.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjytkp4obzh8lnn686cwlb87y07nq6f6
> >
> > [2]
> >
> http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
> >
>
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
no mistakes
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: [DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Posted by JiaTao Tao <ta...@gmail.com>.
Can't agree more:
A. For people in power, remember that your opinions are outsized. Apply
them only where you think it is absolutely critical to the overall health
of the community. You may have strong opinions about simple things. Do your
best to ignore these opinions because enforcing them only goes to
further solidify the asymmetric nature of your relationship.
B. For people in power, try to be the last to express an opinion as opposed
to the first or most frequent. For "opinion-type" threads, you should
strive to be a small minority of the total messages. If you find yourself
responding to every other sender, you're probably abusing your power.
Regards!
Aron Tao
Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org> 于2021年12月23日周四 04:29写道：
> This is a hard message to respond to. Hopefully my comments will reduce the
> friction for others to share their own observations. Something that I will
> reiterate here is that Julian posted this on a public forum which is a
> request to not only get feedback from committers and PMC members but the
> community at large. To help facilitate this, I would suggest that more
> active project members only make a single response to this to allow "space"
> for others to provide their feedback.
>
> Firstly, at least for me, it is a hard time of year to have this kind of
> nuanced & sensitive conversation since I'm doing a lot of holiday family
> stuff in the coming weeks.
>
> Secondly, having recently re-engaged in this project, I've written several
> emails in a similar vein to Julian's and then each time decided not to send
> it. If I felt like saying this multiple times and Julian sat down and
> actually sent it, I would guess that others had similar questions/concerns.
>
> ## General observations:
> - I think Julian and Vladimir are far and above the most prolific
> contributors on the project (by any measure I can use: code, commits, email
> responses, longevity, consistency, releases, etc). [3]
> - I think Julian and Vladimir typically have the strongest opinions. (This
> is pretty standard, the most prolific contributors typically have the
> strongest opinions.)
> - I think we have a general challenge around power asymmetry (people with
> power aren't always aware of how this power influences others).
> - I think Julian and Vladimir are the two project titans. People frequently
> defer to them. When they go "mano a mano", it is challenging as there is
> less deference and more conflict. It also can devolve.
>
> ## Challenging Behaviors
> I see a few specific patterns occur frequently that I think are challenging
> and we should strive to correct. These include:
>
> 1. Presenting traditions, personal preferences or opinions as "rules". [2]
> 2. Being a dog with a bone (responding quickly and repeatedly to everyone
> who has a differing opinion).
> 3. General disrespectfulness (dismissive of others' perspective and/or
> opinions, condescending behavior, unilateral action).
>
> I think all three of these behaviors are net-negative for the community.
>
> ## Goals
> I think a few of things would help mitigate these challenges:
>
> A. For people in power, remember that your opinions are outsized. Apply
> them only where you think it is absolutely critical to the overall health
> of the community. You may have strong opinions about simple things. Do your
> best to ignore these opinions because enforcing them only goes to
> further solidify the asymmetric nature of your relationship.
> B. For people in power, try to be the last to express an opinion as opposed
> to the first or most frequent. For "opinion-type" threads, you should
> strive to be a small minority of the total messages. If you find yourself
> responding to every other sender, you're probably abusing your power.
> C. For everyone, call out behavior that you think violates the norms of the
> community you want to be a part of.
>
> All three of these goals are very hard to accomplish. A&B rely on
> self-reflection (hard). C relies on those with less authority calling out
> those with more authority (very hard).
>
> To share my personal self-reflection: I'll admit to having done #2 a couple
> of times. I also admit that I frequently fail to call out all three
> challenging behaviors when I see others exhibit them. The experience of
> these behaviors has substantially reduced my interest/effort to contribute
> to the project both recently and at several times in years past. I will do
> my best to avoid the 1/2/3 behaviors and follow the A/B/C goals.
>
> As I said at the top, I think it is important to leave space for others to
> respond and will hold off responding more to this thread. My ask to others
> would be to do your best at the goals I outlined as A,B and C above.
>
> [1] Authority here is meant as karma around contribution, not formal Apache
> authority.
> [2] A challenging version of this frequently happens when someone "in
> power" is trying to provide feedback to someone "without power". What a
> person "in power" may intend as help or ideation may be interpreted as
> demand by the person "without power". Karmic authority in a community like
> Calcite can frequently approximate power.
> [3] While they are the top two contributors, it would be unfair to say they
> were equal in their scale of contribution and I don't mean to imply such.
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 9:45 AM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hey community, I need your help. You might have noticed that Vladimir
> > and I are fighting it out in a long email thread [1].
> >
> > I find it stressful and time-consuming to be involved in threads such
> > as this with Vladimir. And I find myself taking out my frustrations on
> > my family. I should not have to go through this.
> >
> > Ten years ago Ceki Gülcü, founder of Log4j, wrote a blog post on why
> > he left Apache [2]. It's a great post, and you should read it.
> > Vladimir himself has cited it in other Apache threads recently,
> > although he probably identifies with different personas in the post
> > than I do.
> >
> > One of the themes of the blog post is that the community must step in
> > and enforce culture, and not give trolls the benefit of the doubt.
> >
> > Read the article, and having read it, if you agree, step up.
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjytkp4obzh8lnn686cwlb87y07nq6f6
> >
> > [2]
> >
> http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Trolls and community
Posted by Jacques Nadeau <ja...@apache.org>.
This is a hard message to respond to. Hopefully my comments will reduce the
friction for others to share their own observations. Something that I will
reiterate here is that Julian posted this on a public forum which is a
request to not only get feedback from committers and PMC members but the
community at large. To help facilitate this, I would suggest that more
active project members only make a single response to this to allow "space"
for others to provide their feedback.
Firstly, at least for me, it is a hard time of year to have this kind of
nuanced & sensitive conversation since I'm doing a lot of holiday family
stuff in the coming weeks.
Secondly, having recently re-engaged in this project, I've written several
emails in a similar vein to Julian's and then each time decided not to send
it. If I felt like saying this multiple times and Julian sat down and
actually sent it, I would guess that others had similar questions/concerns.
## General observations:
- I think Julian and Vladimir are far and above the most prolific
contributors on the project (by any measure I can use: code, commits, email
responses, longevity, consistency, releases, etc). [3]
- I think Julian and Vladimir typically have the strongest opinions. (This
is pretty standard, the most prolific contributors typically have the
strongest opinions.)
- I think we have a general challenge around power asymmetry (people with
power aren't always aware of how this power influences others).
- I think Julian and Vladimir are the two project titans. People frequently
defer to them. When they go "mano a mano", it is challenging as there is
less deference and more conflict. It also can devolve.
## Challenging Behaviors
I see a few specific patterns occur frequently that I think are challenging
and we should strive to correct. These include:
1. Presenting traditions, personal preferences or opinions as "rules". [2]
2. Being a dog with a bone (responding quickly and repeatedly to everyone
who has a differing opinion).
3. General disrespectfulness (dismissive of others' perspective and/or
opinions, condescending behavior, unilateral action).
I think all three of these behaviors are net-negative for the community.
## Goals
I think a few of things would help mitigate these challenges:
A. For people in power, remember that your opinions are outsized. Apply
them only where you think it is absolutely critical to the overall health
of the community. You may have strong opinions about simple things. Do your
best to ignore these opinions because enforcing them only goes to
further solidify the asymmetric nature of your relationship.
B. For people in power, try to be the last to express an opinion as opposed
to the first or most frequent. For "opinion-type" threads, you should
strive to be a small minority of the total messages. If you find yourself
responding to every other sender, you're probably abusing your power.
C. For everyone, call out behavior that you think violates the norms of the
community you want to be a part of.
All three of these goals are very hard to accomplish. A&B rely on
self-reflection (hard). C relies on those with less authority calling out
those with more authority (very hard).
To share my personal self-reflection: I'll admit to having done #2 a couple
of times. I also admit that I frequently fail to call out all three
challenging behaviors when I see others exhibit them. The experience of
these behaviors has substantially reduced my interest/effort to contribute
to the project both recently and at several times in years past. I will do
my best to avoid the 1/2/3 behaviors and follow the A/B/C goals.
As I said at the top, I think it is important to leave space for others to
respond and will hold off responding more to this thread. My ask to others
would be to do your best at the goals I outlined as A,B and C above.
[1] Authority here is meant as karma around contribution, not formal Apache
authority.
[2] A challenging version of this frequently happens when someone "in
power" is trying to provide feedback to someone "without power". What a
person "in power" may intend as help or ideation may be interpreted as
demand by the person "without power". Karmic authority in a community like
Calcite can frequently approximate power.
[3] While they are the top two contributors, it would be unfair to say they
were equal in their scale of contribution and I don't mean to imply such.
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 9:45 AM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hey community, I need your help. You might have noticed that Vladimir
> and I are fighting it out in a long email thread [1].
>
> I find it stressful and time-consuming to be involved in threads such
> as this with Vladimir. And I find myself taking out my frustrations on
> my family. I should not have to go through this.
>
> Ten years ago Ceki Gülcü, founder of Log4j, wrote a blog post on why
> he left Apache [2]. It's a great post, and you should read it.
> Vladimir himself has cited it in other Apache threads recently,
> although he probably identifies with different personas in the post
> than I do.
>
> One of the themes of the blog post is that the community must step in
> and enforce culture, and not give trolls the benefit of the doubt.
>
> Read the article, and having read it, if you agree, step up.
>
> Julian
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gjytkp4obzh8lnn686cwlb87y07nq6f6
>
> [2]
> http://ceki.blogspot.com/2010/05/forces-and-vulnerabilites-of-apache.html
>