Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I'm sorry

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–277 of 277 posts

Re: I'm sorry

#271

Post by rectang »

camkego wrote: post #231
rectang wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EDIT: Mea culpa. I have found additional documentation that conflicts and reveals that there is now an an additional copyright-assignment track. See my soon-to-appear reply. On https://dotnetfoundation.org/projects/submit I found the following: > Assignment and Contribution Models. The .NET Foundation uses either an assignment model or a contribution model for on-boarding new projects. Under the assignment model, a…

Here is the best part, if you dig a little deeper into the issues and pull requests, you will find out that the .NET Foundation people have been removing the contribution option from the blank agreements, leaving only the assignment option. Lol! Unsurprisingly, this upset some of the developers on the projects, as they were unclear about how this affected them.

The consequences seem foreseeable and I don't understand why the DNF would do that. The difference between copyright licensing and copyright assignment is a big deal. If you think it makes strategic sense to transition (which I don't understand either), to my mind you'd better be loud and bold, overcommunicating in order to maintain trust — with project founders, contributors, and the broader community (including outsiders like you (?) and me).

FWIW, this would never happen at the ASF. The 800 or so Members of the ASF (who elect the Board) are drawn from the projects, so the kind of people who are upset at the DNF would be in a position to take action at the ASF (by electing a different board).

Re: I'm sorry

#272

Post by chrisofspades »

gorgoiler wrote: post #177

Well, if you ask me, I’d like to see an apology for the one-line whitespace change, using !=true , and closing the XML tag without a space. From the commit which started this whole brouhaha: https://github.com/reactiveui/splat/commit/cd2cbb807b36dd89b... That’s some grade A hornet nest kicking right there. /s

Visual Studio removes that space automatically when you use it to manage dependencies. It's quite annoying.

Re: I'm sorry

#273

Post by emodendroket »

psysharp wrote: post #207
emodendroket wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. The essence of civilization is suppressing animal instincts in service of a higher goal.

No, it's abstractions of animal instincts, and that difference is huge.

I don't think so. A lot of those instincts, such as killing, are pretty strongly proscribed.

Re: I'm sorry

#274

Post by emodendroket »

vcmak wrote: post #208
emodendroket wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. The essence of civilization is suppressing animal instincts in service of a higher goal.

I've been around long enough to know that the higher goal is to line the pockets of those who establish and enforce the "polite" interaction rules. They give orders to the workers (in the broadest sense, workers can be productive professors) and skim off a percentage of the output.

OK, sure, that's the order we live under, and it's not ideal. But better than running around foraging all day, and if you wish to change it it's better to save the rage for situations where it's called for.

Re: I'm sorry

#275

Post by satisfice »

dgb23 wrote: post #196
satisfice wrote: post #89

I don’t know enough about this to comment, except to say, gee, isn’t the social and business life of human adults complicated? Yes it is. It is complicated. How strange, then, that so many people seem to jump with both feet into complicated shared ownership arrangements with near strangers— leading to the absurdity of public messages flying around instead keeping these communications private to the specific people wh…

Because it is a public open source project?

Yes. Stop that. Or else maybe don’t be surprised when it all goes wrong. Communal projects are an invitation to drama.

Re: I'm sorry

#276

Post by cdogl »

cormacrelf wrote: post #204
dgb23 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it is a public open source project?

They're discussing this on a public forum, but only sharing screenshots of small sections of PDFs which remain private. The CLAs are the governing documents here, and nobody except the people who have access to those agreements in full have any business even forming an opinion as to what rights are held by whom. Posting selected parts (literally just the definitions section, the non operative part!) for public point-…

I'm sympathetic to this argument, but the fact that the blog posts, discussions, tweet threads etc. under issue are publicly viewable (that's the web!) doesn't imply an obligation that members of the debate perform for the public as if it were a political debate or a court room. I suspect that the intended audience of posts by aggrieved maintainers is other maintainers in the community. Oughtn't they be able to communicate and organise without putting their communications under lock and key?

Here we are now discussing it privately on HN and GitHub as we're a bunch of busy-bodies, but I am not necessarily prepared to blame the maintainers for that.

Re: I'm sorry

#277

Post by cormacrelf »

cdogl wrote: post #276
cormacrelf wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're discussing this on a public forum, but only sharing screenshots of small sections of PDFs which remain private. The CLAs are the governing documents here, and nobody except the people who have access to those agreements in full have any business even forming an opinion as to what rights are held by whom. Posting selected parts (literally just the definitions section, the non operative part!) for public point-…

I'm sympathetic to this argument, but the fact that the blog posts, discussions, tweet threads etc. under issue are publicly viewable (that's the web!) doesn't imply an obligation that members of the debate perform for the public as if it were a political debate or a court room. I suspect that the intended audience of posts by aggrieved maintainers is other maintainers in the community. Oughtn't they be able to commu…

Someone here claims that DNF has forced all comms onto the public forums, and if that’s the case I think you’re right.
Post reply on HN