4 ms·

Not sure which "hostile post" you are referring to, as I don't think the submitted article is hostile at all. It's just very clear in what the author is trying

Not sure which "hostile post" you are referring to, as I don't think the submitted article is hostile at all. It's just very clear in what the author is trying to get across. But anyway, this is how we got to the point of Hickey writing this post: - Heavy Clojure User received bunch of feedback from friends and colleagues asking why something hasn't been fixed yet in Clojure core - Heavy Clojure User sees that bunch of stuff hasn't been fixed, so they take it on themselves to fix these issues and submit patches - The workflow of "Submit patch -> Have Hickey review it and deny it -> Make changes -> Wait for Hickey again -> etc etc" was too slow for the Heavy Clojure User - So Heavy Clojure User made their post describing "How to contribute to Clojure", blaming the core team for not working tightly enough with the community and spending enough time reviewing/accepting patches - Hickey publishes this post titled "Open Source is Not About You" not entirely aimed at "Heavy Clojure User" but the community at large, while still being a reaction to that post by Heavy Clojure User - Heavy Clojure User apologizes for the initial post, for tying Clojure with their own identity and explains a period of self-reflection has begun.

chris_wot 4y ago
Sometimes directness comes across as hostility. Telling someone they aren't entitled to something can come across as hostile, even though it isn't and is merely the truth.
oxplot 4y ago
> as I don't think the submitted article is hostile at all Tone is lost in text and I don't have much background. If I was thinking of contributing to Clojure, this post is reason enough to stay away from it. Based on your explanation, I think Hickey should have simply ignored the user's post and let that be the end of it. I mentioned "blunt" response to individual contributions. That is quite different to a blanket statement with a "we don't owe you s... - f... off if you don't like it" vibe.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  The blanket statement is correct, though. It may not be couched in a palatable way, but only in that it doesn't spend lots of words on how lovely everyone is and how few people it is addressing. It just says what's true and leaves it at that. If you'd rather not work in that environment then that's reasonable, but I think it's a little refreshing compared to what I normally read from big OSS projects.
- mvc 4y ago
  > If I was thinking of contributing to Clojure, this post is reason enough to stay away from it. Without wanting to sound flippant or rude, I think they'd be cool with that. They're talking about contributions to the core language here. Not fixing typos in a README. In mature projects like this, all the low-hanging fruit is done. You can't just take a notion some weekend and fire off a useful pull request. It requires an investment. To make a good contribution to Clojure you have to.... - clearly define the problem that needs to be solved - get other people on the core team to agree that it needs to be solved - document a number of ways to solve it, discuss with the community which one will work best - let these ideas stew for a while, people might change their minds The above constitutes 95% of the work and would typically take months rather than days. Once all that's done, coding up the implementation is the easy bit.
  - oxplot 4y ago
    > Not fixing typos in a README. That's a detail that, even if specifically was mentioned, would be overshadowed by the main sentiment.

chris_wot 4y ago

Sometimes directness comes across as hostility. Telling someone they aren't entitled to something can come across as hostile, even though it isn't and is merely the truth.

oxplot 4y ago

> as I don't think the submitted article is hostile at all Tone is lost in text and I don't have much background. If I was thinking of contributing to Clojure, this post is reason enough to stay away from it. Based on your explanation, I think Hickey should have simply ignored the user's post and let that be the end of it. I mentioned "blunt" response to individual contributions. That is quite different to a blanket statement with a "we don't owe you s... - f... off if you don't like it" vibe.

robertlagrant 4y ago
The blanket statement is correct, though. It may not be couched in a palatable way, but only in that it doesn't spend lots of words on how lovely everyone is and how few people it is addressing. It just says what's true and leaves it at that. If you'd rather not work in that environment then that's reasonable, but I think it's a little refreshing compared to what I normally read from big OSS projects.
mvc 4y ago
> If I was thinking of contributing to Clojure, this post is reason enough to stay away from it. Without wanting to sound flippant or rude, I think they'd be cool with that. They're talking about contributions to the core language here. Not fixing typos in a README. In mature projects like this, all the low-hanging fruit is done. You can't just take a notion some weekend and fire off a useful pull request. It requires an investment. To make a good contribution to Clojure you have to.... - clearly define the problem that needs to be solved - get other people on the core team to agree that it needs to be solved - document a number of ways to solve it, discuss with the community which one will work best - let these ideas stew for a while, people might change their minds The above constitutes 95% of the work and would typically take months rather than days. Once all that's done, coding up the implementation is the easy bit.
- oxplot 4y ago
  > Not fixing typos in a README. That's a detail that, even if specifically was mentioned, would be overshadowed by the main sentiment.