3 ms·

To clarify, I was on the Google Workspace Developer Relations team, the majority of my work was that exact OSS release process. It is not clearly documented and

To clarify, I was on the Google Workspace Developer Relations team, the majority of my work was that exact OSS release process. It is not clearly documented and always changing. You can read some of it here, https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing/approval https://opensource.google/documentation/reference/releasing/..., but like I said it is always changing. Relevant: https://www.theregister.com/software/2023/01/27/what-is-google-doing-with-its-open-source-teams/341033 https://www.theregister.com/software/2023/01/27/what-is-goog...

deleted 4mo ago
[deleted]
Ferret7446 4mo ago
The OSS release process has always stated that you can't use Google branding for a unilateral launch. You aren't making yourself look better
- justinwp 4mo ago
  The "G" logo is a GitHub organization setting that applies to all repos in GitHub.com/googleworkspace and has for years.
dekhn 4mo ago
Something in the explanation is missing here. It's still not clear to me from any of the provided context whether you got approval to release this. At least from my understanding of your role, if you had approval and used an official google repository, you would not get fired for merely publishing code that accesses a documented API through documented endpoints. Hence many people are wondering if you released this without approval (that's my guess), if you used a Google repo to do it (from what I can tell you did use a google repo, but not an officially supported one, and other teams at google use this repo to publish code), and whether there were other extenuating circumstances, or if it was "the workspace SVP called my division's VP and told him to fire me" (just a guess for another firing mechanism).
- computerdork 4mo ago
  ...By the way, on a different subject, 4 days ago, had read your comments on a different post dealing with Alzheimer's. Just now, asked you a follow up question, and it's easy for them to get buried in your hackernews comments threads, so thought I'd just mention it. Thanks!
- justinwp 4mo ago
  There was a Ariane/Launch with bits flipped including the eng bit from my manager.
  - dekhn 4mo ago
    then there is some detail missing from your report- for example, if leadership asked you to take down the repo (perhaps because another team was building/releasing/launching their own) and you refused, then you weren't fired for creating the Google workspace CLI, but for something else. In short, the way the post is framed, and the reality behind it, don't seem to match up, and people with experience are asking for you to clarify. If you don't want to go into more detail, that's fine, but... many people (like me) read what you wrote and thought "there must be more detail than this, because it would be silly for somebody to get fired for doing their job in good faith, and following the rules"
anon84873628 4mo ago
Straight from that page: >This includes side projects that have not gone through IARC, even for DevRel engineers. So did you do this "Launcher2" or "Ariane" thing and get the approvals? If so, it seems your ass would be covered. If not... I can sympathize that the process seems convoluted and could particularly bite a DevRel accustomed to more autonomy. One would hope Google would do the whole blame free retrospective thing and improve the systems.
- justinwp 4mo ago
  Yes there was a launch with eng bit flipped by manager.
  - yardsold 4mo ago
    what is this bit flipping shit you keep alluding to?
pinkmuffinere 4mo ago
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it really sounds like you knew the policy in depth, and even contributed to the design of the policy, but when it came to your pet project you ignored it by skipping the release process? Am I missing something?
- justinwp 4mo ago
  Wasn't ignored or skipped.
- neonsunset 4mo ago
  [dead]
fg137 4mo ago
How do you explain "This is not an officially supported Google product."? https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli
- whstl 4mo ago
  There are plenty of such projects with similar disclaimers under Google's own /google/ organization. To give a few examples: https://github.com/google/python-fire https://github.com/google/python-fire / https://github.com/google/pytype/blob/main/docs/index.md https://github.com/google/pytype/blob/main/docs/index.md / https://github.com/google/dopamine https://github.com/google/dopamine / https://github.com/google/go-tika https://github.com/google/go-tika Also plenty of official Google organizations that are not /google/ , but have official projects. https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/discussions/865 https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/discussions/865 / https://github.com/google-research/big_vision https://github.com/google-research/big_vision / you can find plenty more I wouldn't read too much into it, since it can mean virtually anything.

deleted 4mo ago

[deleted]

Ferret7446 4mo ago

The OSS release process has always stated that you can't use Google branding for a unilateral launch. You aren't making yourself look better

justinwp 4mo ago
The "G" logo is a GitHub organization setting that applies to all repos in GitHub.com/googleworkspace and has for years.

dekhn 4mo ago

Something in the explanation is missing here. It's still not clear to me from any of the provided context whether you got approval to release this. At least from my understanding of your role, if you had approval and used an official google repository, you would not get fired for merely publishing code that accesses a documented API through documented endpoints. Hence many people are wondering if you released this without approval (that's my guess), if you used a Google repo to do it (from what I can tell you did use a google repo, but not an officially supported one, and other teams at google use this repo to publish code), and whether there were other extenuating circumstances, or if it was "the workspace SVP called my division's VP and told him to fire me" (just a guess for another firing mechanism).

computerdork 4mo ago
...By the way, on a different subject, 4 days ago, had read your comments on a different post dealing with Alzheimer's. Just now, asked you a follow up question, and it's easy for them to get buried in your hackernews comments threads, so thought I'd just mention it. Thanks!
justinwp 4mo ago
There was a Ariane/Launch with bits flipped including the eng bit from my manager.
- dekhn 4mo ago
  then there is some detail missing from your report- for example, if leadership asked you to take down the repo (perhaps because another team was building/releasing/launching their own) and you refused, then you weren't fired for creating the Google workspace CLI, but for something else. In short, the way the post is framed, and the reality behind it, don't seem to match up, and people with experience are asking for you to clarify. If you don't want to go into more detail, that's fine, but... many people (like me) read what you wrote and thought "there must be more detail than this, because it would be silly for somebody to get fired for doing their job in good faith, and following the rules"

anon84873628 4mo ago

Straight from that page: >This includes side projects that have not gone through IARC, even for DevRel engineers. So did you do this "Launcher2" or "Ariane" thing and get the approvals? If so, it seems your ass would be covered. If not... I can sympathize that the process seems convoluted and could particularly bite a DevRel accustomed to more autonomy. One would hope Google would do the whole blame free retrospective thing and improve the systems.

justinwp 4mo ago
Yes there was a launch with eng bit flipped by manager.
- yardsold 4mo ago
  what is this bit flipping shit you keep alluding to?

pinkmuffinere 4mo ago

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it really sounds like you knew the policy in depth, and even contributed to the design of the policy, but when it came to your pet project you ignored it by skipping the release process? Am I missing something?

justinwp 4mo ago
Wasn't ignored or skipped.
neonsunset 4mo ago
[dead]

fg137 4mo ago

How do you explain "This is not an officially supported Google product."? https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli https://github.com/googleworkspace/cli

whstl 4mo ago
There are plenty of such projects with similar disclaimers under Google's own /google/ organization. To give a few examples: https://github.com/google/python-fire https://github.com/google/python-fire / https://github.com/google/pytype/blob/main/docs/index.md https://github.com/google/pytype/blob/main/docs/index.md / https://github.com/google/dopamine https://github.com/google/dopamine / https://github.com/google/go-tika https://github.com/google/go-tika Also plenty of official Google organizations that are not /google/ , but have official projects. https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/discussions/865 https://github.com/googleapis/googleapis/discussions/865 / https://github.com/google-research/big_vision https://github.com/google-research/big_vision / you can find plenty more I wouldn't read too much into it, since it can mean virtually anything.