atom feed107 messages in org.apache.communityRe: Rules for Revolutionaries
FromSent OnAttachments
28 earlier messages
Andrew C. OliverNov 8, 2002 4:57 pm 
Andrew C. OliverNov 8, 2002 5:03 pm 
Martin van den BemtNov 8, 2002 5:14 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 8, 2002 5:48 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 8, 2002 5:51 pm 
James TaylorNov 8, 2002 5:56 pm 
Craig R. McClanahanNov 8, 2002 5:58 pm 
Craig R. McClanahanNov 8, 2002 6:05 pm 
Sam RubyNov 8, 2002 6:17 pm 
Andrew C. OliverNov 8, 2002 6:38 pm 
Andrew C. OliverNov 8, 2002 6:40 pm 
Ceki GülcüNov 9, 2002 12:29 am 
Jeff TurnerNov 9, 2002 2:44 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 3:27 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 4:13 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 4:25 am 
Andrew C. OliverNov 9, 2002 4:27 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 4:31 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 4:35 am 
Andrew C. OliverNov 9, 2002 4:36 am 
Danny AngusNov 9, 2002 4:39 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 4:50 am 
Martin van den BemtNov 9, 2002 5:21 am 
Ceki GülcüNov 9, 2002 6:28 am 
Costin ManolacheNov 9, 2002 8:50 am 
Sam RubyNov 9, 2002 9:29 am 
Costin ManolacheNov 9, 2002 10:23 am 
Ceki GülcüNov 9, 2002 10:49 am 
Ceki GülcüNov 9, 2002 10:58 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 9, 2002 12:33 pm 
James Duncan DavidsonNov 9, 2002 3:29 pm 
James Duncan DavidsonNov 9, 2002 3:37 pm 
Chuck MurckoNov 9, 2002 6:08 pm 
Rodent of Unusual SizeNov 10, 2002 5:29 am 
Ceki GülcüNov 10, 2002 6:22 am 
James Duncan DavidsonNov 10, 2002 9:14 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 11, 2002 7:05 pm 
Stephen McConnellNov 11, 2002 7:26 pm 
Sam RubyNov 11, 2002 7:41 pm 
Jeff TurnerNov 11, 2002 7:43 pm 
Stephen McConnellNov 11, 2002 7:43 pm 
Ovidiu PredescuNov 11, 2002 9:34 pm 
Ovidiu PredescuNov 11, 2002 9:36 pm 
Sam RubyNov 11, 2002 9:51 pm 
Jeff TurnerNov 11, 2002 11:18 pm 
Andrew C. OliverNov 12, 2002 7:18 am 
Stefano MazzocchiNov 12, 2002 7:25 am 
Martin van den BemtNov 12, 2002 8:19 am 
Joe SchaeferNov 12, 2002 8:20 am 
Jeff TurnerNov 12, 2002 8:20 am 
29 later messages
Subject:Re: Rules for Revolutionaries
From:Costin Manolache (cos@covalent.net)
Date:Nov 9, 2002 8:50:06 am
List:org.apache.community

Ceki,

I think you got your analogy mixed up completely :-)

The communism is characterized by dictatorship ( not always benevolent). Most western countries are characterized by democracy.

The communism didn't fall because of ideology - I can tell you the ideology had little to do with the reality. At least in some countries it fell because of centralized economy, abuses, etc.

As for the "liberal ideology" - that's how apache has worked so far. Every committer has a vote and a veto ( and unfortunately the veto can turn anyone into a small dictator ).

Costin

On Sat, 2002-11-09 at 00:29, Ceki Gülcü wrote:

I keep wondering why you keep bringing up Duncan's Whoa Bessie... mail. I mean this one:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=97712718421034&w=2

Is it just for historical purposes? Is it because Duncan expresses interesting ideas with eloquence? Sure, Duncan may have been wrong in the Ant context but that should not discredit his ideas altogether.

The liberal ideas expressed by Stefano, Sam and to some extent Costin are very inspiring and definitely please a wider audience than Duncan's ideas defending the actions of a selfish pig as he puts hit. (No, I don't think that Duncan is a selfish pig and you shouldn't either.)

However, liberal ideologies are just that, ideologies. While Duncan's theory of benevolent dictators might not find favor in the eyes of this public, we should not discard it as being contrary to the Apache way. We should instead recognize it as being a legitimate way of development. It may even be the dominant way of development at Apache under disguise.

In addition, it is much easier to stand up and talk about the interest of the community than the interests of individuals less you come off as supporting selfish pigs or being a selfish pig yourself.

On a wider scale, it was very hard for the West to fight Communism because the communist ideology sells much better to the unprivileged. Yet 75 years later, the West won, not because of its persuasiveness but because it had much more to show on the store shelves than the communists. Communism is a great idea but it doesn't work. Capitalism is hard to sell but it ends up having better results on the long run.

Coming back to Jakarta, I am not suggesting that anyone is at fault. All I am suggesting is that we to stop trashing the work achieved by individuals acting as clear leaders. Leadership is not bad per se.

I may be stating the obvious here. So be it.

At 11:01 07.11.2002 -0500, Sam Ruby wrote:

I differ with that rendition, and believe that it is harmful to the community for it to be propogated.

Duncan rejoined Ant and was immediately accepted as a committer. He started work on an internal fork named "AntEater". This went on for a short while, until another fork came along named "AntFarm". At that point, Duncan said "Whoa Bessie" and started to put forward a case that he had a unique right to determine what codebase bore the Ant name.

This lead up to a PMC meeeting with Brian and Roy in attendance where it was affirmed that the name of a project went with the expressed wishes of a majority of commmitters to that project. This has been the policy that we have followed in Jakarta ever since.

References:

http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=97712718421034&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=97712745500023&r=1&w=2 http://jakarta.apache.org/site/pmc/01-01-17-meeting-minutes.html

- Sam Ruby

P.S. It is my understanding that what is now Apache HTTPD 2.0 is also the result of a number of forks, one of which ultimately emerged as being the one accepted by the community.

-- Ceki

TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793