[zeromq-dev] Dev Process

[Martin Lucina]

skaller at users.sourceforge.net said:
> > Under Martin Sustrik's lead, we had a mediocre community, and a great
> > product.
> > 
> > Under Pieter Hintjens' lead, we have a great community, but are rapidly
> > progressing towards a mediocre product.
> 
> Can you point to issues in the actual source and documentation that
> explain that view in more detail?

Yes, but doing so would continue this war of words, and I have
no wish to do that, now that I understand the positions of the players
involved.

The cards have been dealt, Pieter Hintjens has shown his hand and Martin
Sustrik has folded. I can't win this round, and attempting to do so will
just look silly.

You're welcome to re-read my past posts to the list on this topic, and
you and anyone else interested are also invited to discuss this further,
off-list, in the "lets have a fun argument about this over beer" sense.

The beer part would be fun if I was coming to the Portland conference, but
schedule- and geography-wise I can't fit it in :-(

> I'm too new here to have a view, but I think that as we're in Pieter's
> "contribution" phase for 3.1,  and are yet to get up to the "rigorous
> testing" phase intended to stabilise the product .. well you don't
> seem to be giving Pieter's model a chance.

You're absolutely right. In fact, Pieter has asked me privately to please
give the model a chance, so out of respect for Pieter as a person, not
Pieter as Meta-Dictator, I'll stop actively criticising the process now.

For the record: I will continue to submit patches in accordance with the
established process, but I will refrain from being drawn into revert-wars
of "best patch wins"; instead I will continue to review and comment on
interesting patches as and when I have time.

In other words I am opting out of this point:

"Anyone who is discontent with a patch will make their own patch to fix or
reverse the previous patch. Again, maintainers have no opinion on this."
^^^^^^^

-mato