4 ms·

High number of "Rich needs to get his act together" comments this year. There's always a few in the comments, but its a much higher percentage this time around.

High number of "Rich needs to get his act together" comments this year. There's always a few in the comments, but its a much higher percentage this time around. More than a few who said they left after Rich's "clarification" of how he views open source last year.

kgwxd 8y ago
Now they're gone, so the number should be lower next year.
puredanger 8y ago
"High" = about 1% of respondents (~25 / 2500).
huahaiy 8y ago
If they have left, why are they responding to the survey? Interesting.
bjoli 8y ago
I think that clarification is reasonable. What rubbed people the wrong way is, imho, that people expect the "usual" approach to open source contributions. Instead it is very much optimized for Rich's time and vision. People who spent lots of time writing something have been met with either silence or a "thanks but no thanks". I am not saying that Rich is doing anything wrong. What I am saying is that there has been a clash of expectations. I agree completely with Rich's clarification on OSS, but I think it failed to actually meet the ones that have been hurt (for the lack of a better word) by the process so far. But that is just my view as an outsider. I have never actually used clojure more than just for fun.
- filoeleven 8y ago
  Your last line applies to me too. Isn’t one of the touted strengths of Clojure that if you want to do something your way, you can make a library, and you don’t have to wait for or rely on the core language maintainers to accept it as canon? So whether or not your proposal makes it into core, you can still put it out there and people can still make use of it if they find it useful. Specter looks like a good example of this.
  - bjoli 8y ago
    Well, there was some kind of ruckus about a pretty big change to the compiler that was met with a thanks but no thanks. I completely understand becoming frustrated by that.
    - comma_at 8y ago
      Hard to say without context. Was the change discussed with the core team? Did they say yes and then suddenly backed out? Otherwise I don't see much reason for being frustrated.

kgwxd 8y ago

Now they're gone, so the number should be lower next year.

puredanger 8y ago

"High" = about 1% of respondents (~25 / 2500).

huahaiy 8y ago

If they have left, why are they responding to the survey? Interesting.

bjoli 8y ago

I think that clarification is reasonable. What rubbed people the wrong way is, imho, that people expect the "usual" approach to open source contributions. Instead it is very much optimized for Rich's time and vision. People who spent lots of time writing something have been met with either silence or a "thanks but no thanks". I am not saying that Rich is doing anything wrong. What I am saying is that there has been a clash of expectations. I agree completely with Rich's clarification on OSS, but I think it failed to actually meet the ones that have been hurt (for the lack of a better word) by the process so far. But that is just my view as an outsider. I have never actually used clojure more than just for fun.

filoeleven 8y ago
Your last line applies to me too. Isn’t one of the touted strengths of Clojure that if you want to do something your way, you can make a library, and you don’t have to wait for or rely on the core language maintainers to accept it as canon? So whether or not your proposal makes it into core, you can still put it out there and people can still make use of it if they find it useful. Specter looks like a good example of this.
- bjoli 8y ago
  Well, there was some kind of ruckus about a pretty big change to the compiler that was met with a thanks but no thanks. I completely understand becoming frustrated by that.
  - comma_at 8y ago
    Hard to say without context. Was the change discussed with the core team? Did they say yes and then suddenly backed out? Otherwise I don't see much reason for being frustrated.