Here's an explanation of DoOcracy, as linked from the open letter:
https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy
(If you're like me and hadn't heard of the concept before.)
Open letter to Gitea
31–40 of 152 posts
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#32Am I right in assuming that though lots of work has happened in gitea since the fork, at least half of the code there was still written by the guy behind gogs?
They're just going to form a for-profit based on his work and cut him out entirely?
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is a multi-step process. First you do the right thing and kindly ask to repair trust that has been breached. If that doesn't work, which is a likely outcome, discussion about forks are in order. "Just fork it" is easy to say, but with large projects require careful consideration. There's too many people saying "just fork it" all too casually, if you ask me.
> First you do the right thing and kindly ask to repair trust that has been breached Gitea is a self-labeled "DoOcracy". nobody owes an apology. forking is inherent to open source methodology. ideological conflicts help nobody but those who lead them. the fact is that the work is done by few, and those few have decided to exercise their rights in open source to do what is their prerogative.
I feel you're missing the point. This person is saying that one should communicate first. If you perceive communication exclusively as "activism" or "apology" seeking (or cancellation?), then I understand why you might not choose that path.
But others often choose open comms before heavy action, and many contributors would support that.
And yes, "forking" is subjectively a heavier action to some ppl. It's subjective, for sure. To each their own, I guess :)
Respectfully, I'm not one who would take or support your advice to act earlier (and such is my right)
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#34While communication may not have been handled perfectly, this is an annoyed, entitled, entirely unnecessary tract. Tellingly, it never appears to be the ones who do the actual work who throw such tantrums. And how about just extending the benefit of the doubt instead of immediately feeding the outrage machine?
> Tellingly, it never appears to be the ones who do the actual work who throw such tantrums. And how do you know that, if I may ask?
No post body was provided.
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#35While communication may not have been handled perfectly, this is an annoyed, entitled, entirely unnecessary tract. Tellingly, it never appears to be the ones who do the actual work who throw such tantrums. And how about just extending the benefit of the doubt instead of immediately feeding the outrage machine?
You can't slander them by saying they're throwing a tantrum, without even talking about what parts of the document you're referring to or why it is you feel that way, and then decry how they're not giving anyone the benefit of the doubt. That is pearl clutching. Writing them to resolve this issue in good faith, is giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Talk about "feeding the outrage machine". The irony is thick in this thread wirh people who are outraged by "outrage culture", without being specific (trademarks and website, and the broken promise on community ownership of these assets). Even the current top comment complains in the abstract - people have become what they hate as they fight the culture wars.
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#36...domains and trademarks...are one of the most important assets any Free Software project has (if not the most important)...
This rubs me the wrong way. Surely the discussion history, documentation, and the freaking code are more important than the name.
I generally don't like open source becoming beholden to comercial interests, and I don't know enough about this story to know if that's really what is happening here. Reading that the name may be more important than the code is just very off-putting.
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First you do the right thing and kindly ask to repair trust that has been breached Gitea is a self-labeled "DoOcracy". nobody owes an apology. forking is inherent to open source methodology. ideological conflicts help nobody but those who lead them. the fact is that the work is done by few, and those few have decided to exercise their rights in open source to do what is their prerogative.
I feel you're missing the point. This person is saying that one should communicate first. If you perceive communication exclusively as "activism" or "apology" seeking (or cancellation?), then I understand why you might not choose that path. But others often choose open comms before heavy action, and many contributors would support that. And yes, "forking" is subjectively a heavier action to some ppl. It's subjective,…
No post body was provided.
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#38...domains and trademarks...are one of the most important assets any Free Software project has (if not the most important)... This rubs me the wrong way. Surely the discussion history, documentation, and the freaking code are more important than the name. I generally don't like open source becoming beholden to comercial interests, and I don't know enough about this story to know if that's really what is happening her…
On the other hand... OpenOffice vs. LibreOffice. Clearly the name was immensely valuable in that case.
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#39I highly recommend Adam Curtis' documentary "The Mayfair Set" [1],
especially Part 2, detailing the lives of Jim Slater, Tiny Rowland and
James Goldsmith who pioneered the hostile takeover, and the effect of
acquisitions and mergers on the overall global economy. Hard to
imagine that only 50 years ago this wasn't a "done thing". Today I see
these same patterns play out in development and artistic communities
oblivious to 51 percent and Sybil attacks, unaware of who is holding
what key assets, and then being surprised by takeovers and defectors.
Re: Open letter to Gitea
#40I get tired of community uprisings and activism that fundamentally misunderstand how open source works, fork it. If you're not the in the top producers in a DoOcracy then you neglected your right to exert influence in the direction of the project. I've led a few larger projects and the rate at which the least of us will have the biggest opinions about who is -owed- what is flabbergasting. DoOcracy's are great, but th…
This is the step right before forking. If diplomacy fails, then you fork. A silent fork is much less likely to gain traction. This letter raises awareness for the problem and is the reaction to it is a solid foundation for a fork.