21–30 of 124 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm totally out of the loop. What did DHH do? Edit: I did a little googling and it sounds like he banned political speech at work? Is that the extent of it? His Wikipedia article doesn't say anything about controversy or racism.
He writes about controversial topics on his personal blog, and is on the right side of the political spectrum
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm totally out of the loop. What did DHH do? Edit: I did a little googling and it sounds like he banned political speech at work? Is that the extent of it? His Wikipedia article doesn't say anything about controversy or racism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'm totally out of the loop. What did DHH do? Edit: I did a little googling and it sounds like he banned political speech at work? Is that the extent of it? His Wikipedia article doesn't say anything about controversy or racism.
[flagged]
[flagged]
> As such, Andre's goal with Ruby Together was characterized as an effort to fund development activities—initially his own, but eventually others—by paying themselves a market hourly rate. I remember being extremely sympathetic to this perspective, having also wasted countless hours of my life maintaining open source for free only for others to benefit from it.
You're misrepresenting the article.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Be that as it may, they effectively entirely handed governance of Ruby Central over to a single party and manufactured a funding crisis that that party used to make drastic change. This directly damaged the entire Ruby community. Their dollars had influence that they could have used to steer the organization elsewhere, but instead they took their toys away and gave control to the very people they disagreed with.
A system with a single failure point is inherently unstable. It's not a question of if it will fail but when it will fail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A system with a single failure point is inherently unstable. It's not a question of if it will fail but when it will fail.
There wasn't a single failure point until Sidekiq pulled their funding, that's why Ruby Central's reaction to impending failure, as you said, was so extreme.
If this is the reaction of the Ruby Community then no wonder they got themselves into this mess to begin with. Like deciding the intern should be fired for dropping prod and not the CTO who told everyone to use admin permissions for everything.
[flagged]
Why do you lay fault with the sponsor pulling funding, and not with the people who opted to have someone so controversial as a speaker, causing the sponsor to pull funding?
Notice I said Rails community, not Ruby community. Not letting DHH speak at RailsConf is like barring the Pope from the Vatican. There are a lot of big new changes in Rails this year that he has been championing. He was absolutely the right person to give the keynote.
[flagged]
> I remember being extremely sympathetic to this perspective, having also wasted countless hours of my life maintaining open source for free only for others to benefit from it. I also recall a figure like either $200 or $250 per hour being mentioned as the rate he was effectively paying himself. Whatever the rate actually was, I distinctly remember thinking, "holy shit, that's a lot higher than individual donors would probably assume."
I agree that maintainers of popular open-source projects deserve to be paid enough for a decent standard of living, but $200/hr (* 40hr/wk * 50wk/yr = $400k/yr) is excessive.
[flagged]