UPDATE: Whaddayaknow! Beryl-project.org has an announcement on the front page with the poll. Don’t know if it’s anything to do with my post, but it came up today 🙂
Nothing on compiz.org yet though…
Tody I finally got off my lazy ass, and wrote my heart out. I made a post on the Opencompositing forums. I encourage casual Beryl/Compiz users who read this to get involved, if you agree with me or not.
My points:
- The forums on OpenCompositing.org has a very small user base
- There was a name thread, asking people for suggestions, stating that this was not the place for discussion
- The thread was on the front page of these forums, but nowhere else (beryl-project.org or compiz.org)
- A lot of people ignored the discussion point
- The names mentioned the most (duh…) where included in a poll
- No censoring names that has trademark issues took place
- The poll is not advertised ANYWHERE
In my opinion, this is not a democracy. In order for it to be one, it takes:
- A voter base that reflects the users
- Information to the users
In my original post, I suggested the following:
- The poll is taken down IMMEDIATELY
- Some of the people on the mailing list get their shit together. I don’t care about Beryl-/Compiz-people. This is now a merged project. Shut up or comply! You’re making OSS in general look like a play ground for aggressive morons.
- The developers of the new merge (people actually doing stuff, besides shooting their mouth), come up with some good ideas based on the long term goals of the project, with minimum trademark problems.
- The REAL suggestions are set up as a vote in an ordered fashion. Having phpBB setting restraints on how many candidates seems idiotic. (phpBB sets a limit on the number)
In my next post, my point was that the project needs a leader or a group of leaders. This is what I said:
I feel that Beryl/Compiz suffers due to the fact that there is no one in charge. I thnik, but could be wrong, that there should be either:
a) a dedicated leader, or a team of 2-3 leaders that decide what should and should not be done
b) a vote amongst the developers on crucial issues
Or a combination of the two.
I base this on the fact that discussions on the mailing list seem to be high in agression, and have no apparent solution. A leader or team of leaders could say:
1. “This is the issue at hand. Suggestions are welcome.”
2. “Suggestions are as follows. Discuss freely for x days”
3. “We have discussed this issue for x days…
3a: “… There is an apparent solution, which is blablabla. We agree. Next issue.”
3b: “… There is no abvious agreement…
3b-1: “…Let’s put it to a vote. All in favour? Opposed? We decide that, xyz. Next issue.”
3b-2: “… The team of leaders decide that, xyz. Next issue.”
Also: “Joe Q. Developer has decided on 10 different occassions not to comply with developer rules stated in xyz. He is on forced absence for 10 days, and will be excluded from discussion. If he repeats himself he will be permanently suspended.”
If the leader(s):
- are true leaders in the eyes of other devs, other devs will comply. If they don’t they are sabotaging the project, and are likely not good for the project, no matter how much they contribute.
- remain true to the agreed-upon project guidelines and comply with the project spirit (i.e. the athmosphere of the the devs combined), they will be true leaders.
- are not true leaders, they will be replaced.
If they want the support of the larger community, they have to be relatively open, making Joe Q. User feel valued. If they don’t want (the support of) a larger community, they might as well end the project, because it will die. (A lot of dedicated users => more devs who know what they’re doing)
Difficult ideals: Sure
Impossible: No (for examples, see a huge amount of distros out there)
In the end, the devs must decide this for themselves. But not having a clear direction, and a set of rules of code
Another ugly blaaahg 