2 ms·

true, but without details we are not able to find out anything about the nature of these issues, and therefore it is not possible to draw any conclusions that w

by em-bee 3y ago

true, but without details we are not able to find out anything about the nature of these issues, and therefore it is not possible to draw any conclusions that would be helpful. i am an f-droid user, and i am certainly concerned if there are issues in the community. but this post does not help to enlighten matters and i feel it will only attract vocal outsiders who have nothing substantial to contribute. this issue needs to be handled internally by the active f-droid contributors, and if they are not issuing public statements with details on what is actually going on then the rest of us should stand back. i doubt any message here is going to be helpful in resolving issues or even just learning more.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
More details are available, but were hidden by one of the remaining project members. They're still available on archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20231117190207/https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/446 https://web.archive.org/web/20231117190207/https://gitlab.co... Issue 448 is said to be relevant as well, and similarly hidden, but isn't available on archive. The fact that a remaining project member seems to be actively hiding otherwise public discussion which would keep us more informed, seems to itself be noteworthy ("Because I felt like it" was the reason given). Indeed, that action seems to be an example of the unilateral and arbitrary exercise of power with which the former contributors are raising concerns. One wonders if a precedent can be set for getting an HN story of potential wrongdoing buried by hiding or destroying reports or evidence of it.
Timshel 3y ago
The top comment now link archived issues with more context. We now know that at least 2/3 of the board had resigned. I don't know what more do you want ? As you said we won't solve anything but with such important issues I want to be informed and not hidden and flagged. Especially since the current plan for the mentionned Hans is to continue business as usual with no change ...
lucideer 3y ago
> this issue needs to be handled internally What a truly odd sentiment from someone with an apparent interest in open-source community-led projects.
- em-bee 3y ago
  on the contrary. open source (or free software) doesn't mean that every dispute has to be out in the open. there must be room to handle disputes privately, and the actions by some of the people involved here seem to show that they do not want to handle this in public. (whether that is justified or not is a different question, but again, without details we are unable to make that judgement) i find that dragging disputes into the public is often used for one side to draw support in their favor. i don't think that this is happening here, as the statements made are to vague. but in general i am not a fan of making such things public as it prevents people who are involved from opening up and sharing their concerns in the internal discussion for fear of having them made public too. we need to give people in dispute the space to resolve their issues without forcing them to face the court of public opinion.
  - lucideer 3y ago
    > doesn't mean that every dispute has to be out in the open Of course not, nor did I imply such an extreme. > we need to give people in dispute the space to resolve their issues without forcing them to face the court of public opinion. This only functions with balanced moderating forces within an internal dispute - where there is a clear power imbalance (e.g. a technical lead who holds exclusive keys to things), resolution of a dispute in private will typically lean heavily in favour of those holding defacto power, leaving "the court of public opinion" a sole remaining last resort.
    - LjLies 3y ago
      There is no space left. The people "in dispute" have left the project, and no one in the F-Droid space is really speaking up against Hans doing whatever he feels like despite the final (short-lived?) existence of councils and boards.
    - em-bee 3y ago
      i respectfully disagree. the power issue can not be solved by the court of public opinion either. at best it can shame the people who refuse to be reasonable, but when that happens the damage is already done, and a reasonable solution is no longer possible. just look at this case. from our perspective here, there are only two options: hans continues as before, or hans is entirely removed from the project. i don't see any way to come to a solution where both sides continue to be able to work together. such a solution is only possible before the naming and shaming in public begins. an amicable solution requires that the parties involved can speak without fear of retribution. dragging this into the public makes that pretty much impossible. if the parties can not solve the problem on their own, they can find mediators (from their community or from outside) to help. if that is not enough the inner community, the active contributors can get involved, and only if that fails too, it may be right to make the issue public. but, at that point the choices usually have already been made (as we can see here again, with some of the people involved resigning) and our public opinion and discussion here can do nothing that would improve the situation.

by em-bee 3y ago

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago

More details are available, but were hidden by one of the remaining project members. They're still available on archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20231117190207/https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/446 https://web.archive.org/web/20231117190207/https://gitlab.co... Issue 448 is said to be relevant as well, and similarly hidden, but isn't available on archive. The fact that a remaining project member seems to be actively hiding otherwise public discussion which would keep us more informed, seems to itself be noteworthy ("Because I felt like it" was the reason given). Indeed, that action seems to be an example of the unilateral and arbitrary exercise of power with which the former contributors are raising concerns. One wonders if a precedent can be set for getting an HN story of potential wrongdoing buried by hiding or destroying reports or evidence of it.

Timshel 3y ago

The top comment now link archived issues with more context. We now know that at least 2/3 of the board had resigned. I don't know what more do you want ? As you said we won't solve anything but with such important issues I want to be informed and not hidden and flagged. Especially since the current plan for the mentionned Hans is to continue business as usual with no change ...

lucideer 3y ago

> this issue needs to be handled internally What a truly odd sentiment from someone with an apparent interest in open-source community-led projects.

em-bee 3y ago
on the contrary. open source (or free software) doesn't mean that every dispute has to be out in the open. there must be room to handle disputes privately, and the actions by some of the people involved here seem to show that they do not want to handle this in public. (whether that is justified or not is a different question, but again, without details we are unable to make that judgement) i find that dragging disputes into the public is often used for one side to draw support in their favor. i don't think that this is happening here, as the statements made are to vague. but in general i am not a fan of making such things public as it prevents people who are involved from opening up and sharing their concerns in the internal discussion for fear of having them made public too. we need to give people in dispute the space to resolve their issues without forcing them to face the court of public opinion.
- lucideer 3y ago
  > doesn't mean that every dispute has to be out in the open Of course not, nor did I imply such an extreme. > we need to give people in dispute the space to resolve their issues without forcing them to face the court of public opinion. This only functions with balanced moderating forces within an internal dispute - where there is a clear power imbalance (e.g. a technical lead who holds exclusive keys to things), resolution of a dispute in private will typically lean heavily in favour of those holding defacto power, leaving "the court of public opinion" a sole remaining last resort.
  - LjLies 3y ago
    There is no space left. The people "in dispute" have left the project, and no one in the F-Droid space is really speaking up against Hans doing whatever he feels like despite the final (short-lived?) existence of councils and boards.
  - em-bee 3y ago
    i respectfully disagree. the power issue can not be solved by the court of public opinion either. at best it can shame the people who refuse to be reasonable, but when that happens the damage is already done, and a reasonable solution is no longer possible. just look at this case. from our perspective here, there are only two options: hans continues as before, or hans is entirely removed from the project. i don't see any way to come to a solution where both sides continue to be able to work together. such a solution is only possible before the naming and shaming in public begins. an amicable solution requires that the parties involved can speak without fear of retribution. dragging this into the public makes that pretty much impossible. if the parties can not solve the problem on their own, they can find mediators (from their community or from outside) to help. if that is not enough the inner community, the active contributors can get involved, and only if that fails too, it may be right to make the issue public. but, at that point the choices usually have already been made (as we can see here again, with some of the people involved resigning) and our public opinion and discussion here can do nothing that would improve the situation.