Re: clear policy discussions

[Janek Warchoł]

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 6:43 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>> Obviously, Graham would like to "dumb down" the rules as much as
>> possible indeed (as long as he is the Release Manager it means less
>> work for him).  But he didn't say that the rules *must* be 100%
>> dumbed-down.
>> I think that you exaggerated a bit.
>
> No, I was commenting on our current policies.

Ah, ok.  I was talking about Graham's attitude to new policies.

>>> In particular since it would make those others feel like they count,
>>> do something for the success of the project, and are part of a team
>>> turning out code, decisions, and releases.
>>
>> I see that you're angry with current system.
>
> It is not a matter of angry.  It fails to do its job, and does it in a
> manner that is damaging to the morale of the developers.

ok, bad word - my mistake (i mean, a wording mistake - i've named your
feeling/attitude/.. wrongly).  Replace with "disappointed" or whatever
you find most suitable.
:)

>> What do you think about my revised proposal?  I think it addresses
>> these issues.
>
> I think we have arrived at a point where experimenting around with
> decision-making systems does not make sense.

Did i understand correctly that in your opinion my proposal is another
"no thinking, monkey-like" "facts make the decision themselves"
system, similar to current one?  Sure, it can be used in that way, but
it allows a lot more.

> Amendments to the policies
> means that we change the ways and degrees to which we depend on luck.
> It's like fiddling with motor parameters for a car that does not start.
> Perhaps it is time to walk.  At least to the gas station.

Why not.  But who'll carry the gasoline?  ;)


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Trevor Daniels <address@hidden> wrote:
> a) a release-meister with responsibility to take all decisions.
> Would need to be someone with a similarly wide overview.

I think there may be no person with overview encompassing whole
LilyPond.  When Han-Wen was the decisionmaker, Lily was smaller and
most of the code was written by 2 people.


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Phil Holmes <address@hidden> wrote:
> I could envisage a stable release being pushed out because the RM
> thought it optimum, but another team member being significantly annoyed
> because, say, it had a bug that stopped his music setting.

Like David, i don't think that any /developer/ would be concerned.
For example, i would be using Lily *compiled from git* exclusively if
GNU/Linux was my primary OS.


On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:29 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> The rules are supposed to help us, not block us.  We need to be able to
> deal _appropriately_ with them, and there is no rule set that would fit
> every situation when followed blindly.

+1

> Well, I am obviously currently in a mood to dismiss the parliament and
> declare military rule, so I probably should take a break of a few days
> in this discussion.  I don't find myself able to contribute in a manner
> that is actually constructive [...]

I do find it constructive.
(hopefully this is visible in my comments)

best,
Janek