5 ms·
Regardless of whether he has the right to veto the consensus vote to remove the joke, by ignoring the general attitude that it’s not in good taste, he’s alienat
by _sdegutis 8y ago
Regardless of whether he has the right to veto the consensus vote to remove the joke, by ignoring the general attitude that it’s not in good taste, he’s alienating everyone. That’s not a good position to put himself in, and I wonder if he’ll soon find himself the head of a dead project while a forked one lives in in his spirit but without his name.
- noobermin 8y agoThis[0] is relevant. He's possibly alienating only a group of vocal people. It isn't clear form the article that it's the consensus more than it is the consensus of people in an email thread. After clicking around the mailing list, it looks more like what [0] suggests than it being a clear majority of contributors to glibc. That said, alienating anyone could be problematic. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/753720/ https://lwn.net/Articles/753720/
- olliej 8y agoThat group being the maintainers?
- noobermin 8y agoI'll admit I'm not big into the who's who behind glibc, but I saw 4 or so people speak against it. Are those 4 the only main maintainers of glibc? Do you know?
- adrianratnapala 8y ago> That said, alienating anyone could be problematic. Heckler's vetoes are also bad for the public.
- dragonwriter 8y agoIt doesn't seem to be about good taste, but the purpose of technical documentation. And, further, about project governance.
- madrox 8y agoIt’s certainly poor leadership. If you aren’t taking an active hand in shaping culture or driving norms in a team, you’re going to end up surprised when they don’t make the same choices you would. Once surprised, don’t try to right the ship with a mandate. For the maintainers, this may be a proxy for how decisions are made. For RMS, this may be about realizing the world has changed around him.