Diversity (Was: Re: FW: Error compiling ...)

[Stefan Urbanek]

Citát David Ayers <d.ayers@inode.at>:

> Adam Fedor wrote:
> >> From: Alex Perez [mailto:aperez@student.santarosa.edu]
> >> 
> >> It's not an angry rant. Get over it. If others misinterpret or read
> >> too much into a very literal question and concern, it's not an 
> >> issue with me.
> > 
> > 
> > I think it should be an issue, though. A lot of people interpret your
> > replies as angry rants, despite your feelings about them. Email is a
> > very difficult medium to communicate in. It is difficult to
> > communicate emotion and intentions using it. That is why everyone
> > needs to be extra careful about how they say things. It may seems
> > like a waste of time, but it is also very difficult to get people to
> > work with you or see things your way unless you try to emphasis with
> > their point of view.
> 
> FWIW, I also dismissed the post as a ranting provocation.  I'm not sure
> how many people view it as a genuine contribution.  If you wish to
> contribute, try removing the mframe code, make sure it works on
> 'supported' platforms by posting a patch and asking people to test it.
> 

There are many kinds of people and they have different knowledge. Each one is
an
expert (specialist) in his own field, either by profession, education or as a
hobby. In a project each knowledge and skill should be appreciated, regardless
whether it is programming, design, abstract thinking, project management,
marketing, communication, etc.

It is fatal mistake that only programming and development skills should be
valued to an open-source project. I have an impression that if someone does not
do programming, then he is recognised as useless for a project. Comments like
"stop talking, implement it if you do not like how it is now" are only
higlighting the programmers elitism. It is like saying that only workers at
construction tables are important in a factory. Each position in a factory
should be valued equally as each position is important for the whole to work,
produce goods and most importantly: survive.

Programmers and thinkers should go hand in hand and cooperate, not argue. One
party says: "you only talk, program!" and the other says: "you are too deep in
your code, see around!". Noone is going to change his attitude to the project
and both approaches if taken separately are not going to produce reasonable
results. What is needed? A bit of tollerance and understandability of each
other mixed with constructive communication.

Alex does not do lots of programming, as far as I know. On the other hand, he
has great ability to see things in larger context. Also I think he is good in
seeing future consequences of certain issues being them states of project,
behaviour of classes, decisions or actions taken in the project. He is a
thinker and he points out things how they are. What is wrong with it?

Also, why I have the impression that some developers get offended when someone
says that this or that feature is bad or this new thing should be implemented?
Because they are too responsible for their parts of the project. There is
nothing wrong with the responsibility. Problem is, that they think that they
should implement the feature X or they should fix the problem Y. If they have
no time, thay say, that the one who made the suggestion should implement it. If
he can not, prehaps because he is not good programmer, then he should stop
talking ang go back to his sand-box. Hey! But why do you feel too responsible?
Because you are alone for your subproject, or there are only few of you...

Conlusion? Stop the elitism of programmers. Keep others talking. People are
different. If for nothing more, then just for the record of a problem or of an
idea for future developers (*). Ideas, notes and knowledge have value as well
as code.

Regards,

Stefan Urbanek

(*) Ony for thinking: How many new active developers GNUstep gained last year?
--
http://stefan.agentfarms.net

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
you win.
- Mahatma Gandhi