I would also submit that this survey, while of some interest, doesn't really tackle the actual issue. In general, people agree we need some rules and prefer we don't sink into anarchy. Ok... is that anything we didn't already know?
I think the real issue at hand is what the particular rules are, rather than just whether or not we need more (or more strict) rules. People will be more likely to agree with making more/stricter rules if they actually agree with the new rules. People may even think we need more/stricter rules, but the changes to the rules they want may have nothing to do with what has been proposed (imposed) so far.
If I can hand-wave for a moment, I think that most people are in favour of rules that help with the organizational behaviour of the train so that we all know that the train is going where it's supposed to and when it's supposed to. Where there is contention in a lot of cases is because the rules are mandating new features (e.g. translation, capabilities), or force them to communicate information in some difficult to use way (i.e. all these XML files the project leads have to edit without good tooling).
In short, I think people aren't going to mind being asked to do incremental things that help ensure everything runs smoothly, but people are taking issue with being handed large parcels of extra work, especially when the benefit to them is low (other than getting to be on the train as reward for good behaviour). And they're especially taking issue because they weren't asked, they were just told. I don't think I blame them.
===========================
Chris Recoskie
Team Lead, IBM CDT Team
IBM Toronto
http://www.eclipse.org/cdt
Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>
Ed Merks <ed.merks@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
11/26/2008 04:19 PM
Please respond to
Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
|
Guys,
Given that the "we need stricter rule" votes (choice 5) and the "we already have more than enough rules" votes (choice <= 2) petty much cancel out, doesn't this in fact highlight that we are actually polarized on the issue of raising of the bar verses lowering the bar? I.e.., while it seems reasonable to argue that statistically we agree on 3/4, i.e., keeping the bar where it is, but to argue that the votes support continuous raising of the bar seems dubious at best.
Of course I should learn to shut up when it's futile, but silly me, I keep thinking about those small projects with only one or two people who must-do everything...
We'll see how the council ends up handling enforcement of the rules, i.e., when push comes to shove...
Cheers,
Ed
Richard Gronback wrote:
Absolutely correct, thanks.
If you don’t know who your PMC’s PC rep is, check here: http://www.eclipse.org/org/foundation/council.php#planning
Thanks,
Rich
On 11/26/08 3:42 PM, "Oberhuber, Martin" <Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,
almost 2 weeks ago I invited to join a little poll about how much Rules Eclipse needs. The results are in, and quite interesting I'd think:
http://www.doodle.com/64gndycncpksufx9 <http://www.doodle.com/64gndycncpksufx9>
35 people participated, the majority voting for "Guidance" through rules and "Ok to have rules since we all gain from the train". Looks like the PC is doing the right thing after all. Thanks, Planning Council!
And for those who're still not happy with their must-do's, I believe they can still negotiate. If I'm not mistaken, the process for negotiation is asking your PMC representative at the PC represent your concerns during the next call (correct, Richard?)
Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Oberhuber, Martin
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 12:02 PM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: RE: [cross-project-issues-dev] Galileo Must-do's
Hi Thomas and all,
I find this discussion extremely interesting.
How much Control does Eclipse need to avoid falling apart as it grows?
I created a little poll for this:
http://www.doodle.com/64gndycncpksufx9 <http://www.doodle.com/64gndycncpksufx9>
Looking forward to interesting results,
Cheers,
--
Martin Oberhuber, Senior Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member
http://www.eclipse.org/dsdp/tm
From: cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Hallgren
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:02 AM
To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Galileo Must-do's
I miss the good old days when Open Source communities were based on the contributions that they got, where the contributors were heroes, and the quality of the resulting product were the product of their goodwill and skill. I find that participating in the Eclipse release train nowadays involves efforts that are somewhat overwhelming and that I, instead of adding valid functionality to the areas where I contribute, am forced to implement requirements that brings much less benefit to the intended user base.
I think that when a central management stipulates this many requirements for individual projects, there's a high risk that all the fun is taken out of it. As a contributor, and even as a project manager, I loose control. I no longer decide what's important in my own domain. I no longer prioritize what to do with the time I spend on the projects. Someone else does. A lot of the motivation is thereby lost, replaced with a whip that forces me to comply with a strict set of rules. Was that the intention? I don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, I can see that there are benefits in having a common set of requirements. I just think it's a tad too much now.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
Schaefer, Doug wrote:
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
|