2 ms·

I think it is a fair comparison, because I think Linus WOULD loudly (and with much profanity) fork it and go back to getting shit done rather than hit slow-mo o

I think it is a fair comparison, because I think Linus WOULD loudly (and with much profanity) fork it and go back to getting shit done rather than hit slow-mo on a multi-car highway pile-up. EDIT: After further thought, I do see your point. My comparison was purely hypothetical and has some logical flaws. I'm literally guessing at how he'd handle losing control of the reins. My takeaway was that Doug (who, I should clarify/add, I have a lot of respect for as a hard working OSS guy, but lost a few brownie points from me for this soap opera) actually did want to lead the community effort: "I ask them if I can take over the project in order to be the leadership and ensure this gets moved on," we're his exact words. I guess that is an exemplar of why committed project stakeholders need to get their messaging straight before pointing fingers: You and I had different interpretations of the actors' motivations.Nobody wins when fingers are pointing everywhere. At least someone wins when a stakeholder says, "screw you guys, I'm going to do what I know is right rather than vent about what I know is wrong." EDIT: And to his credit, Doug did try to mitigate the problems he saw with the project. I don't know why he didn't take that one last step of trading on his good name and fork the project. In my opinion, StrongLoop folks are hard working people, more than casually invested in the nodejs community. Even the controversial npm tracking could be argued to be a logical act, to help them understand more about how their projects are used than npm can tell them. Politics (and an unfortunate exit) got the best of them. Doug is a hard working guy. And more than casually invested in the nodejs community. Politics got the best of him, too. I believe Doug will come to regret his participation in this drama, and will quietly go back to writing great software and leading great projects, having learned an important lesson: don't believe for a moment that BigCo gives a tiny rat's ass about you or your community's sensibilities, just be the best dev/leader you can be and don't hand the keys to anyone who isn't a trusted driver. And if they take those metaphorical keys anyway, well then, that's what forks are for.

SwellJoe 11y ago
It's an issue in an issue tracker. Nobody's blogging about it, or doing interviews in the media. I would consider this a reasonable level of drama for an issue tracker conversation. Again, I think Doug is probably pushing this in public (though not dramatically so, again it's an issue tracker which normally would have a couple dozen readers) as a final last ditch effort to get IBM to act right. Nothing wrong with taking things public if private conversations are going nowhere fast, as tends to happen with big corporate takeovers. I don't think he needs to worry about his messaging all that much; he's not a marketer, and doesn't seem to be trying to sell anything or get elected to anything. He's just explaining what's going on, and expressing his frustration with it. Anyway, that's how I read it all. I agree that we are interpreting things differently, and I'm probably missing a lot of detail here. I scanned the thread and missed some details you've called out. But, I tend to take an optimistic approach to stuff like this. If someone has proven they're mostly a "head down get shit done" kinda person, I'm not gonna sweat it when they pop their head up and rant for a little while when things go pear-shaped. I'd probably rant, too, if something I was working on was being killed by a corporate overlord. Then I might decide to fork the thing.
- spdustin 11y ago
  That's a fair implication, that I didn't give Doug all the credit he's due as a "head down get shit done" kinda guy, so let me correct that: Doug is an amazing talent, and it's a raw deal that he got sucked into the politics of this; I hope he's able to move on (FWIW I think his name carries enough weight that a fork would get attention) and we can all forget the soap opera that happened on that thread.
jeswin 11y ago
Forking a project as significant as Express isn't easy; you need help from many people to get it going. You make it sound as simple as clicking a button. (Linus may pull it off easily because he's Linus, but that proves nothing.) This "soap opera" isn't of Doug's making. What he's saying seems very fair to me: he's willing to work on it if it's a community effort, and not under a corporate banner. Throughout the thread, he gives excellent reasons which justify his stand. > The whole thing should've been on the IBM back channels until they got their shit together and could agree on some messaging Earlier, you said this should have been solved in IBM's internal channels. Why? Doug doesn't work for IBM, and doesn't owe them anything. He's well within his rights to protest or complain openly, irrespective of how it affects IBM. > don't hand the keys to anyone who isn't a trusted driver Here's a link that explains what happened https://github.com/strongloop/express/issues/2264 https://github.com/strongloop/express/issues/2264 > just be the best dev/leader you can be ... Oh come on! We should be thankful for the effort so many talented people are putting in FOSS, often for no financial gain.
- spdustin 11y ago
  I mentioned the dialog in IBM's back channels because Doug himself was pushing a participant there once he got some traction in that more appropriate venue: "Now, please stop contacting me as a side channel without the context of the conversations I have been having with IBM. Please get involved in the existing IBM channels I have, so you have context here." You are correct: Doug does give excellent reasons for supporting the project under the expressjs org, the same reasons brought up back when the github ownership of the project changed (as in the issue you linked). The public debate only served to confuse and frustrate watchers, and that is the "soap opera" I refer to. It's unfortunate that sometimes such public drama is necessary to effect change, but as evidenced by the issue raised when the repo was taken over originally, public drama wasn't going to effect any change here. It now serves only to foment ill-will and promote confusion, regardless of who is "right". You are also right that we should be thankful for OSS contributors' efforts. I am thankful for his. For StrongLoop's too, in fact. I am, however, not thankful for the wasted energy in maintaining the debate on a github issue, when the debate didn't do any good the first time 'round. I am not thankful that politics have derailed the work. EDIT: I think you misunderstood my "be the best..." comment. I was merely suggesting that Doug would find himself less stressed if he was able to focus on doing what he loves and not playing politics.

SwellJoe 11y ago

It's an issue in an issue tracker. Nobody's blogging about it, or doing interviews in the media. I would consider this a reasonable level of drama for an issue tracker conversation. Again, I think Doug is probably pushing this in public (though not dramatically so, again it's an issue tracker which normally would have a couple dozen readers) as a final last ditch effort to get IBM to act right. Nothing wrong with taking things public if private conversations are going nowhere fast, as tends to happen with big corporate takeovers. I don't think he needs to worry about his messaging all that much; he's not a marketer, and doesn't seem to be trying to sell anything or get elected to anything. He's just explaining what's going on, and expressing his frustration with it. Anyway, that's how I read it all. I agree that we are interpreting things differently, and I'm probably missing a lot of detail here. I scanned the thread and missed some details you've called out. But, I tend to take an optimistic approach to stuff like this. If someone has proven they're mostly a "head down get shit done" kinda person, I'm not gonna sweat it when they pop their head up and rant for a little while when things go pear-shaped. I'd probably rant, too, if something I was working on was being killed by a corporate overlord. Then I might decide to fork the thing.

spdustin 11y ago
That's a fair implication, that I didn't give Doug all the credit he's due as a "head down get shit done" kinda guy, so let me correct that: Doug is an amazing talent, and it's a raw deal that he got sucked into the politics of this; I hope he's able to move on (FWIW I think his name carries enough weight that a fork would get attention) and we can all forget the soap opera that happened on that thread.

jeswin 11y ago

Forking a project as significant as Express isn't easy; you need help from many people to get it going. You make it sound as simple as clicking a button. (Linus may pull it off easily because he's Linus, but that proves nothing.) This "soap opera" isn't of Doug's making. What he's saying seems very fair to me: he's willing to work on it if it's a community effort, and not under a corporate banner. Throughout the thread, he gives excellent reasons which justify his stand. > The whole thing should've been on the IBM back channels until they got their shit together and could agree on some messaging Earlier, you said this should have been solved in IBM's internal channels. Why? Doug doesn't work for IBM, and doesn't owe them anything. He's well within his rights to protest or complain openly, irrespective of how it affects IBM. > don't hand the keys to anyone who isn't a trusted driver Here's a link that explains what happened https://github.com/strongloop/express/issues/2264 https://github.com/strongloop/express/issues/2264 > just be the best dev/leader you can be ... Oh come on! We should be thankful for the effort so many talented people are putting in FOSS, often for no financial gain.

spdustin 11y ago
I mentioned the dialog in IBM's back channels because Doug himself was pushing a participant there once he got some traction in that more appropriate venue: "Now, please stop contacting me as a side channel without the context of the conversations I have been having with IBM. Please get involved in the existing IBM channels I have, so you have context here." You are correct: Doug does give excellent reasons for supporting the project under the expressjs org, the same reasons brought up back when the github ownership of the project changed (as in the issue you linked). The public debate only served to confuse and frustrate watchers, and that is the "soap opera" I refer to. It's unfortunate that sometimes such public drama is necessary to effect change, but as evidenced by the issue raised when the repo was taken over originally, public drama wasn't going to effect any change here. It now serves only to foment ill-will and promote confusion, regardless of who is "right". You are also right that we should be thankful for OSS contributors' efforts. I am thankful for his. For StrongLoop's too, in fact. I am, however, not thankful for the wasted energy in maintaining the debate on a github issue, when the debate didn't do any good the first time 'round. I am not thankful that politics have derailed the work. EDIT: I think you misunderstood my "be the best..." comment. I was merely suggesting that Doug would find himself less stressed if he was able to focus on doing what he loves and not playing politics.