Subscribe: Comments on: now don’t take this the wrong way
http://shaver.off.net/diary/2007/05/12/now-dont-take-this-the-wrong-way/feed/
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
blog  chris  community  don  mike  moco  mozilla foundation  mozilla platform  mozilla  new  people  response  time  tree  xulrunner 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: now don’t take this the wrong way

Comments on: now don’t take this the wrong way



noise from signal



Last Build Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 07:05:56 +0000

 



By: Wisdom from Mozilla on Healthy F/OSS | Server software

Sat, 09 Jun 2007 01:39:22 +0000

[...] — Mike Shaver, now don’t take this the wrong way. [...]




By: Bread and Circuits » Blog Archive » Taking it to the street

Tue, 22 May 2007 14:22:31 +0000

[...] There’s been a fair bit written in recent days about the importance of community initiative, the role of students, and the part educational institutions can play in order to encourage and enable this.  I couldn’t agree more, and this week I’m working on doing my part to further these ideas. [...]




By: Messina and Firefox

Wed, 16 May 2007 00:27:47 +0000

[...] The response, has been fairly quiet. Some were clearly frustrated others, saw it as an opportunity to bring up their issues. What I haven’t seen (on Planet Mozilla) is a post that really engages Chris’ ideas and says “I don’t agree with Chris on ‘a’ or ‘b’, but he’s right about ‘c.’ ” To be fair, it’s hard to react well to criticism – especially from someone you count on as an ally. When you spend your day fighting billion dollar beasts you don’t exactly want to spend time and energy defending your rear. [...]




By: Chris Messina

Tue, 15 May 2007 17:51:37 +0000

Mike, this is a brilliant and well-written post. Perhaps naively, I didn't expect my video rant to get picked up as much as it did; I've never done video before and learned that the medium is powerful as it is vain. I didn't expect people to sit through 50 minutes of my monologue -- and I'm both glad and disappointed that I provided my 16 bullet points Cliff's Notes to give people a simpler sense of what I was going off about.

If you get a chance to watch it, I think you'll better understand where I'm coming from and what I'm looking for, and I think this post of yours was the response I needed -- at least from someone closer to Mozilla than I ever have been (and, I should add, the response of your well-employed colleagues was, on the whole, disappointing and shallow).

Now, on the other hand, I get a lot of this "stop complaining and start fixing bugs" thing, which I think is tired and more importantly, weak. Not everything is a bug and not everything needs to be patched. Sometimes you need to take time to stop and look around and see how the world is changing and ask the hard questions about whether the problems you're trying to fix haven't already moved into some new theater of operations. In which case, you've really got to step back and question some fundamentals.

It wasn't my intention to drop a bomb or anything like that; but the response has certainly been enlightening. On the one hand, I don't think Mozilla is taking seriously the risk from proprietary RIA frameworks. Nor do I think they're answering the opportunity the desire for RIA development offers for broader Mozilla platform development. Nor do I think Mozilla recognizes the dual Trojan horse aspect a Silverlight-Flash/Apollo world represents. Surely I'm just paranoid, but as Matt put it, only the paranoid survive.

Anyway, I've been stewing on this stuff for the past few days and hope to get a response out (wisely or not) before I head out to NYC for Personal Democracy Forum.




By: Ted Mielczarek

Tue, 15 May 2007 14:22:37 +0000

James: I think you missed his point. If you or anyone else wants to improve XULRunner, just start hacking! MoCo never took anything from the community, it's just managing resources.




By: James

Tue, 15 May 2007 04:51:35 +0000

Mike: ok, I'm wrong about creating new projects in the tree, I was making uninformed speculation. But the real question is can MoCo hand over XULRunner to the community, with the option to take it back when MoCo has more resources to give to it? ISVs most definitely want what MoCo isn't able to provide (blessed XULRunner releases), and are willing to do the legwork, but will they be allowed to do so as part of the Mozilla community or will they have to do it on their own at Mozpad?




By: Gerv

Mon, 14 May 2007 10:01:51 +0000

Wow. This magnificent piece is all that my reply should have been.




By: shaver

Mon, 14 May 2007 09:36:13 +0000

James: who has asked to create a new project in the tree and not been permitted? I don't know of anyone. What improvements are being turned away? There is, I 100% assure you, no MoCo policy against people improving the Mozilla platform in the tree. Sunbird/Lightning, Camino and SeaMonkey are examples of projects that are in the repository and supported with Mozilla Foundation infrastructure without being official products of the Mozilla Foundation or Corporation (with commitment to security updates and other lifecycle elements, or dedicated employee time).

But even by your own logic, people interested in XULRunner wouldn't have to set up their own community. That code is already in the tree, and Mitchell's post explicitly points out what many of us hoped would be obvious: that the Mozilla Foundation is not investing its resources at this time in solving the non-trivial problem of a globally-shared, independently-updated-and-distributed XULRunner system runtime does not mean that contributions will be turned away.




By: James

Mon, 14 May 2007 08:22:10 +0000

You miss one very important point - the core of Mozilla is what's in the CVS repository. I don't know whose fault it is (module owners lacking time, MoCo policy, something else), but people wanting to improve the Mozilla platform can't do it in tree. Apart from SeaMonkey, which is an exception since the code was already there, I don't think anyone's been allowed to create new projects in the tree. Why not? Now it seems that people interested in XULRunner are going to have to set up their own community, rather than being able to do it under the Mozilla Foundation umbrella.




By: John’s Blog » Blog Archive » leverage

Mon, 14 May 2007 01:58:05 +0000

[...] I’ve been thinking a lot the last few days about the debate that’s been going on about what “Mozilla” should do. [I put “Mozilla in quotes here because it’s a quite unusual & difficult to understand thing — but the link to Mike’s post is maybe the best articulation I’ve seen, especially when viewed through special, snark-reducing glasses. (I don’t reduce the snark, personally — it’s what I like about Mike’s posts.)] Or, rather, what Mozilla should do more of, do faster, do better. They’re all right, of course. We should do more, faster, and do it better. The criticisms in the debate, both explicit & implicit, tend to create a lot of introspection & wider debate, which I think, ultimately is good, healthy and productive. Even debates like the one on languages that pops up from time to time helps to clarify things. [...]