Corinthia: ASF or GitHub?

[Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org>]

It’s become clear to me over the past few days that we’ve got some serious problems in this project in terms of agreement on issues surrounding the way it is run.

First of all, I’d like to say that my personal reason for being involved with Corinthia and ASF is to produce high quality software as part of a strong community, for the public good. I judge our achievements ultimately on what we have been able to build, both in terms of the end product and the community of people involved. There are many places in which one can conduct open source projects, and I was attracted to bring this code into Apache and start a project here because I felt that it is the best place to conduct this development.

ASF has many rules and policies, which have been developed and agreed to over a long period of time, and are built on sound reasoning and consensus. I fully support the idea that we should comply with all of these, and ensure we operating according to the Apache Way. My reading of the principles indicates to me that they are sound, and I would like to see Corinthia become a successful top-level project in time.

However, I feel as though the project has been greatly distracted by a large amount of bureaucratic discussion which does not contribute in any positive way to the project, and in fact takes focus away from development and community building. Many of the “issues" raised by Dennis have only served to cause stress for myself and, I imagine, others as well. I consider these discussions a huge waste of time and energy, and drain on motivation. They put us at risk of scaring away new potential committers who just want to come here and help build something great.

These problems have lead me to put a great deal of consideration into how to proceed - the most obvious alternative being to move the project to GitHub. Those who are actively involved in development of the software and documentation can continue as we have been so far, outside of ASF, without hindrance from those who wish to impose an unjustifiably strict interpretation of ASF rules to the detriment of the project. Motivation of team members (and specifically, developers) is crucial, and I place a higher priority on the success of this project and the community than I do on the venue in which it takes place.

This project is only going to work if we, as a team, can find a way to avoid the petty arguments about minor issues, and focus on what matters. I believe this is achievable within ASF (as has been demonstrated by other projects) - but am not presently convinced it’s achievable in our current situation. If things continue the way they are, I’m honestly tempted to suggest we move development to GitHub.

Let’s try and make this project success, however it needs to be done.

Thoughts?

—
Dr Peter M. Kelly
pmkelly@apache.org

PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key>
(fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)

Re: Corinthia: ASF or GitHub?

[Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>]

I have to agree with Louis here.

The community has clearly expressed wanting to work on code and have fun.

The community is also willing to do the right things to follow Apache policy in a reasonable way that is looser than some projects but likely stricter than others.

Let's also be sure to acknowledge that English is a hard language that is not universally the same.

I think this group is a very unique set of people with a lot to give and the willingness to do so. I am sure my quirks annoy at times only being human.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 24, 2015, at 11:00 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 24 Aug 15, at 04:20, Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Thoughts?
> 
> I love policy and am a policywonk I love bureaucracy and love all the great things—no irony—it’s done and doing. Also I love being really cautious about any set of rules, especially when the application of those rules seems to be more in behalf of the rule than for the desired outcome the rule is meant to promote. And I’ve always felt that with small groups working more or less well one does not want to introduce rules whose application would, in different circumstances, be more reasonable and in compliance with policy. In the case of a small project like Corinthia, the insistence of a protocol whose application would cost a tedious retread and risk losing the not just developer enthusiasm but, developers comes across as an assertion of power. And it’s irritating, to say the least.
> 
> People, let’s cool it. That goes to everyone. 
> 
> I’ve been in situations like this before; we all have. In open source projects, one learns to live with what works, even when that goes counter to policy, and to catch what can be caught, and if that’s not feasible, then to urge a "next time let’s be better" approach. Everyone knows it’s hard to work together and that when it happens, it’s fragile, especially for startup projects, like ours. And, again, Corinthia is small. Really small. It will stay that way—and maybe even shrink—if it seems a place of rigid bureaucracy and hostility. 
> 
> So: let’s cool it and move ahead. 
> 
> And, please, all, let’s try to keep communications public and open and inviting. I pushed for Corinthia because I see a huge opportunity for a flexible and advanced productivity tool that is not hobbled by proprietary code or standards and that can run on the devices people use, whatever they be. No other project aspires to do as much and none has as much force behind it. But none of that will matter if we mute ourselves and there is something like Corinthia that pretends to be open but is at heart shrink-wrapped and flows freely like beer to consumers, if not community.
> 
> louis

Re: Corinthia: ASF or GitHub?

[Louis Suárez-Potts <lu...@gmail.com>]

> On 24 Aug 15, at 04:20, Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> Thoughts?

I love policy and am a policywonk I love bureaucracy and love all the great things—no irony—it’s done and doing. Also I love being really cautious about any set of rules, especially when the application of those rules seems to be more in behalf of the rule than for the desired outcome the rule is meant to promote. And I’ve always felt that with small groups working more or less well one does not want to introduce rules whose application would, in different circumstances, be more reasonable and in compliance with policy. In the case of a small project like Corinthia, the insistence of a protocol whose application would cost a tedious retread and risk losing the not just developer enthusiasm but, developers comes across as an assertion of power. And it’s irritating, to say the least.

People, let’s cool it. That goes to everyone. 

I’ve been in situations like this before; we all have. In open source projects, one learns to live with what works, even when that goes counter to policy, and to catch what can be caught, and if that’s not feasible, then to urge a "next time let’s be better" approach. Everyone knows it’s hard to work together and that when it happens, it’s fragile, especially for startup projects, like ours. And, again, Corinthia is small. Really small. It will stay that way—and maybe even shrink—if it seems a place of rigid bureaucracy and hostility. 

So: let’s cool it and move ahead. 

And, please, all, let’s try to keep communications public and open and inviting. I pushed for Corinthia because I see a huge opportunity for a flexible and advanced productivity tool that is not hobbled by proprietary code or standards and that can run on the devices people use, whatever they be. No other project aspires to do as much and none has as much force behind it. But none of that will matter if we mute ourselves and there is something like Corinthia that pretends to be open but is at heart shrink-wrapped and flows freely like beer to consumers, if not community.

louis

Re: Corinthia: ASF or GitHub?

[Gabriela Gibson <ga...@gmail.com>]

Hi all,

I was one of the people to receive repeated emails that were in
essence attempts to move the list's problems into a private space
where methods could be used that would clearly be unacceptable on the
list itself, under the veil of confidentiality.

I do not regard such communications as deserving privacy.

Regards Peter's email, I agree 100%.

I would like Dennis to leave, I do not trust him, I find him difficult
to deal with, I detest his modus operandi, and there is no way I will
ever change my mind about that, or interact with him in any way,
anywhere.

Moreover, I have coded 'under fire' elsewhere before and was held to
ransom with by own creation because I found it hard to walk out on my
work, and I'm so not going to do that ever again.

G

Ps.: Yes, that's a strong, uncompromising opinion and I thought long
and hard whether to post this, because it will add more disharmony and
Dennis will be hurt by being told my deepest thoughts in such an
unvarnished way, which is something that makes me sad for him, but I
also feel that he needs to learn this lesson and be made aware of the
true and full effects this all has on people.

I only wish that I would have written such a letter to other people
making exactly the same mistakes years ago, this entire experience is
a deja vu for me and it contains years of pent up consideration about
what happened.

This time is no different at all, the details vary, but the core and
pattern is exactly the same.

In the end, I decided to post, because some kindly people feel they
can paste over such a deep crack with the 'if only we could all
forgive and get along' method.  I used to think that way, and, I have
a number of such failed experiments in my life to show for it, along
with the scars such experiences leave on the soul.

I know it doesn't work (even though I'd love if it did) and this time
round, I'm going to be adamant to defend my little island of happy
coding community, filled with people I like --- it took me long enough
to find it.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 1:05 PM, jan i <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 24 August 2015 at 10:20, Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> It’s become clear to me over the past few days that we’ve got some serious
>> problems in this project in terms of agreement on issues surrounding the
>> way it is run.
>>
>> First of all, I’d like to say that my personal reason for being involved
>> with Corinthia and ASF is to produce high quality software as part of a
>> strong community, for the public good. I judge our achievements ultimately
>> on what we have been able to build, both in terms of the end product and
>> the community of people involved. There are many places in which one can
>> conduct open source projects, and I was attracted to bring this code into
>> Apache and start a project here because I felt that it is the best place to
>> conduct this development.
>>
>> ASF has many rules and policies, which have been developed and agreed to
>> over a long period of time, and are built on sound reasoning and consensus.
>> I fully support the idea that we should comply with all of these, and
>> ensure we operating according to the Apache Way. My reading of the
>> principles indicates to me that they are sound, and I would like to see
>> Corinthia become a successful top-level project in time.
>>
>> However, I feel as though the project has been greatly distracted by a
>> large amount of bureaucratic discussion which does not contribute in any
>> positive way to the project, and in fact takes focus away from development
>> and community building. Many of the “issues" raised by Dennis have only
>> served to cause stress for myself and, I imagine, others as well. I
>> consider these discussions a huge waste of time and energy, and drain on
>> motivation. They put us at risk of scaring away new potential committers
>> who just want to come here and help build something great.
>>
>> These problems have lead me to put a great deal of consideration into how
>> to proceed - the most obvious alternative being to move the project to
>> GitHub. Those who are actively involved in development of the software and
>> documentation can continue as we have been so far, outside of ASF, without
>> hindrance from those who wish to impose an unjustifiably strict
>> interpretation of ASF rules to the detriment of the project. Motivation of
>> team members (and specifically, developers) is crucial, and I place a
>> higher priority on the success of this project and the community than I do
>> on the venue in which it takes place.
>>
>> This project is only going to work if we, as a team, can find a way to
>> avoid the petty arguments about minor issues, and focus on what matters. I
>> believe this is achievable within ASF (as has been demonstrated by other
>> projects) - but am not presently convinced it’s achievable in our current
>> situation. If things continue the way they are, I’m honestly tempted to
>> suggest we move development to GitHub.
>>
>> Let’s try and make this project success, however it needs to be done.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> —
>> Dr Peter M. Kelly
>> pmkelly@apache.org
>>
>> PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key>
>> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
>>
>> Hi Peter
>
> I fully understand your pow, however I do hope that there other
> possibilities.
>
> Since I am deeply engaged in Corinthia and do not have many years of active
> apache Mentoring, I decided
> (after a talk with a co-mentor Daniel) to contact a mentor who have been
> around for many years. I have not
> yet received a recommendation, but he too said we have problems and saw
> Dennis as not helping the project.
>
> I would really not like to see the main developers abandon the project,
> just to start an identical one on github, that is not what apache is about.
>
> In apache the community is more important than code, and in the community
> diversity is preferred. This means among others not everybody need to be
> developers. It is of course also clear that having different people with
> different goals in
> a community calls for extra flexibility. When a community encounter people
> (to say it politely) that do not fit, an effort
> should be made to regain peace in the community, and explain that their
> behavior is causing problems for
> the community.
>
> I agree with your comments about Dennis, and I think he has been given
> ample time to become a productive part
> of the community as well as a lot of explanations that his focus on rules
> with a often own interpretation is not
> wanted and actually is damaging for the community as a whole. However I
> still would prefer if we do not split the
> community. I did believe Dennis writes email with the best intentions, but
> the emails he sent to at least 2 core
> developers in private, being very negative against Peter and me, suggest
> otherwise (I have not read the
> mails, but the 2 persons have told me the content). Being against the 2
> people who together do the majority of
> the work, is hard to see as positive for the community.
>
> I see a couple of ways to continue:
> - Dennis changes behavior and become an asset for the community (this is my
> preferred solution)
> - Dennis decides to leave the project, or at the very least stop all mail
> activities on our MLs
>   (we cannot just go ahead and block him, that is not how it works)
> - IPMC decides to change the PPMC in order to keep the project alive
> - Act as nothing happened and just ignore Dennis (Dave suggestion)
>   This willl still scare away new people, and seems unacceptable to some
> core developers.
>
> All the above actions will allow us to continue in apache.
> - Dennis continues and most of the main developers leaves the proje
>
> This should really be avoided, it will leave corinthia as an empty shell in
> apache where e.g. Dennis can try to rebuild the project. It is also
> breaking the community because of a single person, in my mind the community
> should be stronger
> than a single person.
>
> I politely suggest, we all think a bit about the consequences of Peters
> email, and give Dennis some room, to make up
> his mind (this is of course not a demand to Dennis, but a simple idea, it
> is totally up to Dennis how Dennis wants act in
> the community).
>
> rgds
> jan i.



-- 
Visit my Coding Diary: http://gabriela-gibson.blogspot.com/

Re: Corinthia: ASF or GitHub?

[jan i <ja...@apache.org>]

On 24 August 2015 at 10:20, Peter Kelly <pm...@apache.org> wrote:

> It’s become clear to me over the past few days that we’ve got some serious
> problems in this project in terms of agreement on issues surrounding the
> way it is run.
>
> First of all, I’d like to say that my personal reason for being involved
> with Corinthia and ASF is to produce high quality software as part of a
> strong community, for the public good. I judge our achievements ultimately
> on what we have been able to build, both in terms of the end product and
> the community of people involved. There are many places in which one can
> conduct open source projects, and I was attracted to bring this code into
> Apache and start a project here because I felt that it is the best place to
> conduct this development.
>
> ASF has many rules and policies, which have been developed and agreed to
> over a long period of time, and are built on sound reasoning and consensus.
> I fully support the idea that we should comply with all of these, and
> ensure we operating according to the Apache Way. My reading of the
> principles indicates to me that they are sound, and I would like to see
> Corinthia become a successful top-level project in time.
>
> However, I feel as though the project has been greatly distracted by a
> large amount of bureaucratic discussion which does not contribute in any
> positive way to the project, and in fact takes focus away from development
> and community building. Many of the “issues" raised by Dennis have only
> served to cause stress for myself and, I imagine, others as well. I
> consider these discussions a huge waste of time and energy, and drain on
> motivation. They put us at risk of scaring away new potential committers
> who just want to come here and help build something great.
>
> These problems have lead me to put a great deal of consideration into how
> to proceed - the most obvious alternative being to move the project to
> GitHub. Those who are actively involved in development of the software and
> documentation can continue as we have been so far, outside of ASF, without
> hindrance from those who wish to impose an unjustifiably strict
> interpretation of ASF rules to the detriment of the project. Motivation of
> team members (and specifically, developers) is crucial, and I place a
> higher priority on the success of this project and the community than I do
> on the venue in which it takes place.
>
> This project is only going to work if we, as a team, can find a way to
> avoid the petty arguments about minor issues, and focus on what matters. I
> believe this is achievable within ASF (as has been demonstrated by other
> projects) - but am not presently convinced it’s achievable in our current
> situation. If things continue the way they are, I’m honestly tempted to
> suggest we move development to GitHub.
>
> Let’s try and make this project success, however it needs to be done.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> —
> Dr Peter M. Kelly
> pmkelly@apache.org
>
> PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key>
> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
>
> Hi Peter

I fully understand your pow, however I do hope that there other
possibilities.

Since I am deeply engaged in Corinthia and do not have many years of active
apache Mentoring, I decided
(after a talk with a co-mentor Daniel) to contact a mentor who have been
around for many years. I have not
yet received a recommendation, but he too said we have problems and saw
Dennis as not helping the project.

I would really not like to see the main developers abandon the project,
just to start an identical one on github, that is not what apache is about.

In apache the community is more important than code, and in the community
diversity is preferred. This means among others not everybody need to be
developers. It is of course also clear that having different people with
different goals in
a community calls for extra flexibility. When a community encounter people
(to say it politely) that do not fit, an effort
should be made to regain peace in the community, and explain that their
behavior is causing problems for
the community.

I agree with your comments about Dennis, and I think he has been given
ample time to become a productive part
of the community as well as a lot of explanations that his focus on rules
with a often own interpretation is not
wanted and actually is damaging for the community as a whole. However I
still would prefer if we do not split the
community. I did believe Dennis writes email with the best intentions, but
the emails he sent to at least 2 core
developers in private, being very negative against Peter and me, suggest
otherwise (I have not read the
mails, but the 2 persons have told me the content). Being against the 2
people who together do the majority of
the work, is hard to see as positive for the community.

I see a couple of ways to continue:
- Dennis changes behavior and become an asset for the community (this is my
preferred solution)
- Dennis decides to leave the project, or at the very least stop all mail
activities on our MLs
  (we cannot just go ahead and block him, that is not how it works)
- IPMC decides to change the PPMC in order to keep the project alive
- Act as nothing happened and just ignore Dennis (Dave suggestion)
  This willl still scare away new people, and seems unacceptable to some
core developers.

All the above actions will allow us to continue in apache.
- Dennis continues and most of the main developers leaves the proje

This should really be avoided, it will leave corinthia as an empty shell in
apache where e.g. Dennis can try to rebuild the project. It is also
breaking the community because of a single person, in my mind the community
should be stronger
than a single person.

I politely suggest, we all think a bit about the consequences of Peters
email, and give Dennis some room, to make up
his mind (this is of course not a demand to Dennis, but a simple idea, it
is totally up to Dennis how Dennis wants act in
the community).

rgds
jan i.