Re: New MI maintainer

[Bob Rossi <bob_rossi@cox.net>]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 05:09:27PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:22:41PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >Sorry, but that's pure demagoguery.  "Open Source" and "Free Software"
> >mean that the sources are available.  They don't mean that every aspect
> >of human life is open to the public.  Even the most open democracies
> >always have closed deliberations about certain issues.  You cannot lead
> >a group in any significant human endeavor without a certain distance
> >between the leadership and the rest, and without closed deliberations
> >about some sensitive issues.
> 
> Amen.
> 
> It's interesting how often people try to tack on bigger concerns to the
> simple concept of Free Software.  Free Software isn't supposed to be
> solving global warming and it isn't supposed to be a demonstration of a
> New World Order with feel-good cum ba yah.  It's just a guarantee that
> you get the source code for the software that you're using.
> 
> Managing any project where people are involved means that sometimes the
> people in charge have to have frank, private conversations.  The
> alternative, as Stan Shebs, notes is to essentially do performance
> reviews in the open.
> 
> Some projects *do* work that way but they are hardly bastions of
> civilized discourse.

This rhetoric annoys me. I was bringing up a sincere concern that I
have. I suggested a more open model because I've been wondering for 
well over 5 years why it (used to?) takes 6 months to get a code review.

Because the time to get a review was so long, I stopped bothering to submit
patches. I remember that I planned my rehersal dinner for my
wedding faster than I could get a code review, and thought that was
wierd.

I hope things are better now that Vladimar has taken his position. If
so, I'll be joining you singing, cum ba yah.

Bob Rossi