Governance revisited

[Jim White]

Vitaliy Margolen wrote:

> Robert Lunnon wrote:
> 
>>>Getting feedback isn't always easy, so listen when you get it.
>>>
>>>If you don't want to go to the effort required to get your patches into
>>>Alexandre's tree, they're not going to get in themselves.
>>>
>>>Mike
>>
>>Rubbish,
>>	The current process is crippling this project, limiting the developer base  
>>and reducing community value. Without some healthy dissent it will never 
> 
> Your "efforts" don't add value to it either. All you trying to do, is
> create another poor quality software that whole world just can't get rid of.
> 
> If you so much like to have bad quality patches, why don't you start
> your own repository, and grant "patch acceptance prise" to any developer
> that sends you one.
> 
> Then look back (after even few weeks) and see where you are comparing to
> where Wine is. Then we can continue the conversation.

That's called a straw man argument.  He didn't say accept patches
willy-nilly.

The whole "quality" and "hack" language is a red herring.  To see that
it is selective and subjective, just look at the code, try xrender.c for
example.

Steven cited the business at Wineconf of Alexandre never being "proved
wrong on a technical matter".  Another straw man.  The part of
Alexandre's patch process that is the root of this conflict between Wine
development-focused developers vs. Wine user-focused developers is that
which consists of style and aesthetic considerations.

CodeWeavers Wine version is full of patches that Alexandre won't accept
for WineHQ.  Obvious proof that the Alexandre's policy isn't the only
way to make a Wine that people value.  In fact it proves that the
WineHQ's patch process is not good enough to make Wine that people will
pay for, while CodeWeavers' is.

> Until then this is whole bunch of trolling and you should restrain from
> making remarks about something that you are not a participant of. This
> is open source project and _everyone_ is free to do _anything_ they'd
> want to do with their free time.

It's an open forum.  And in not way is he not participating.  And the
_everyone_ and _anything_ don't include Robert posting about his issues
with WineHQ's patch process?

And it isn't trolling.  It is symptomatic of the fact that Wine is going
to yield yet another fork once enough folks get motivated enough to make
it happen.  Wine hasn't been complete enough for that to be worthwhile,
but now that it is approaching 1.0, it no doubt won't be long.

But that doesn't mean WineHQ needs to do anything different, now is
there any sign that it is capable of doing anything differently.  I'm
looking forward to innovation in collaboration and SCM tools that can
make this problem manageable (and even though it has great utility, I'm
certain Emacs will not be required for using them).

> If you don't like policies of this project, you are welcome to ... leave.

Many more leave than stay.  And your rudeness just helps that to happen.
 In case you didn't notice, your entire post was signal free.  If Mike
is trolling, you've been hooked.

Jim White
http://darwine.sf.net/