4 ms·
And ditto the reaction of the community. No aggressive denunciations or vindictive chat - just calm and helpful trouble shooting. +1 for the culture they have
by zygomega 13y ago
And ditto the reaction of the community. No aggressive denunciations or vindictive chat - just calm and helpful trouble shooting. +1 for the culture they have created.
- pekk 13y agoWhat are you supposed to do if jerks join your community? Excommunicate them?
- teraflop 13y agoThere's a talk called "How to Protect Your Open Source Project From Poisonous People" [1] that offers some suggestions. [1] http://www.slideshare.net/vishnu/how-to-protect-yourhow-to-protect-your-open-source-project-from-poisonous-people http://www.slideshare.net/vishnu/how-to-protect-yourhow-to-p...
- neeee 13y agoVideo: http://youtu.be/Q52kFL8zVoM http://youtu.be/Q52kFL8zVoM
- sylvinus 13y agoMessing up with git and apologizing publicly is hardly being a jerk IMHO.
- jacalata 13y agoHe means none of them are being jerks - for instance a community of jerks might have responded to the announcement of a pretty inconvenient mistake by abusing the guy who made the mistake.
- kyberias 13y agoUmmmm... I'm pretty sure that was not implied.
- Semaphor 13y agoTo clear it up, it was a question wondering how one would keep a community as jerk-free as the one they seem to have right now.
- sylvinus 13y agoright, thanks!
- homosaur 13y agoLet the programmer who hasn't done something dumb with a Git repo cast the first stone. I know I'm guilty as can be and surely I'm going to transgress in the future. It does kind of show a little bit of a need for a more formal permissions system for Git. Most organizations have something like this in place as policy but that doesn't prevent mistakes.