Nedjo wrote:
There are very few members of our community who consistently meet these measures. Dries is one of them, and Drupal's success is due in significant measure to that fact.
i agree. but let me suggest that there's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on here. i think more members of the community could meet the measures you outlined, if they were given the chance to assume the responsibility, make some mistakes, and learn. what i'm about to say is merely an educated guess, but i'm betting it's fairly accurate given how humans learn and grow: in the beginning, dries probably made more mistakes than he does now in his decisions about what to commit/not commit. he probably committed things that, looking back, he would not have committed given his current level of experience in his position of leadership, or vice versa. he probably learned some invaluable lessons from those mistakes that inform his current decision making process. not providing other people that same process inhibits them from attaining the experience necessary to lead. your greatest lessons come from your mistakes. if, as i have suggested, dries made any mistakes in his time of leadership on the project, we've been able to survive those just fine. we'll survive any mistakes that other leaders will make, too -- especially since they have the benefit of a mentor. in the process we'll build new leaders. (by the way, please don't misconstrue the above to mean that i think the initial commit of the deletion api was a mistake, because i don't! i'm examining a larger dynamic here.) one thing that i find particularly perplexing is the gravity with which these kinds of changes are regarded. we participate in the kind of endeavor where we can make adjustments if we start to see we're heading in the wrong direction. nobody's life is at stake if we make a mis-judgement here or there... ;) i guess for me that engenders some spirit of experimentation -- not wild experimentation, but reasoned changes that result in valuable feedback.
Compare comments here, two and a half years ago: http:// drupal.org/node/15916
in that long thread, this was one of the most salient passages that i found: "One of the concerns people may then have -- a longer-term concern -- for something like Drupal is: what happens when the torch is passed. Does it remain an autocracy, and are people going to be pleased with whomever assumes the role of autocrat? More importantly; what assurance do the contributors have that this is going to result in the continued health and well-being of the thing they have helped create?" those kinds of considerations provide credible weight to idea of grooming new leaders today, no matter what the current conditions are.
On 7/1/07, Chad Phillips -- Apartment Lines <chad@apartmentlines.com> wrote:
Nedjo wrote:
There are very few members of our community who consistently meet these measures. Dries is one of them, and Drupal's success is due insignificant measure to that fact.
i agree. but let me suggest that there's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on here. i think more members of the community could meet the measures you outlined, if they were given the chance to assume the responsibility, make some mistakes, and learn.
Just to name a few: * more chx involvement * Bèr being taken more seriously * more support for decision made by robertDouglass and Kjartan Anyway, the problem taking more people into core development is that there is not a "clear roadmap" to accept new core developers. The current situation can be resumed in some steps: * a developer starts using and developing drupal * until that developer makes some real good module (that should be in core) or "extraordinary something" it will not be "accepted" into core even if he lives to patch bugs * after acception based in meritocracy, there exists a small democracy based on "influence" * finally there is a monarchy to "rule them all" These are the facts and, before anything else, one thing must be said: in this exact moment Drupal lives well, has fantastic developers and a guy that knows how to rule. So where is the problem? Nowhere! There is no problem... yet. And is this small "yet" that should make some of the more influent guys around here think about. Will Drupal community wait for a real problem, to solve it, or prepare the vaccine before the disease comes?
I really won't make it long, but with another person to give final decisions the RTBC queues would deplete faster, the workload on Dries would lessen, the patches going in to core would almost double, and everything will be swell for everyone. Real leaders delegate and I have faith that Dries has or will in fact do that when he finds someone who can share this load. Unfortunately, Dries is the current bottleneck, not because he's not doing a splendid job but because he's a human who can't take the load no matter how hard he tries to prioritize. Dries, why don't you choose a person and hold the right to revoke that authority from him if he goes off track? You'll really have to choose wisely but you will speed things by about the double. And just keep a close eye on him or any complaints that you may get. If this doesn't sound convincing enough then just imagine how things will become once the core developers double in number! Without a sub-Dries things will look twice as bad for core developers as they are now. This is flagging a warning that we should heed. On 7/1/07, Fernando Silva <fsilva.pt@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/1/07, Chad Phillips -- Apartment Lines <chad@apartmentlines.com> wrote:
Nedjo wrote:
There are very few members of our community who consistently meet these measures. Dries is one of them, and Drupal's success is due insignificant measure to that fact.
i agree. but let me suggest that there's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on here. i think more members of the community could meet the measures you outlined, if they were given the chance to assume the responsibility, make some mistakes, and learn.
Just to name a few: * more chx involvement * Bèr being taken more seriously * more support for decision made by robertDouglass and Kjartan
Anyway, the problem taking more people into core development is that there is not a "clear roadmap" to accept new core developers. The current situation can be resumed in some steps: * a developer starts using and developing drupal * until that developer makes some real good module (that should be in core) or "extraordinary something" it will not be "accepted" into core even if he lives to patch bugs * after acception based in meritocracy, there exists a small democracy based on "influence" * finally there is a monarchy to "rule them all"
These are the facts and, before anything else, one thing must be said: in this exact moment Drupal lives well, has fantastic developers and a guy that knows how to rule.
So where is the problem? Nowhere! There is no problem... yet. And is this small "yet" that should make some of the more influent guys around here think about.
Will Drupal community wait for a real problem, to solve it, or prepare the vaccine before the disease comes?
On 7/1/07, Ashraf Amayreh <mistknight@gmail.com> wrote:
I really won't make it long, but with another person to give final decisions the RTBC queues would deplete faster, the workload on Dries would lessen, the patches going in to core would almost double, and everything will be swell for everyone.
Real leaders delegate and I have faith that Dries has or will in fact do that when he finds someone who can share this load. Unfortunately, Dries is the current bottleneck, not because he's not doing a splendid job but because he's a human who can't take the load no matter how hard he tries to prioritize.
Dries, why don't you choose a person and hold the right to revoke that authority from him if he goes off track? You'll really have to choose wisely but you will speed things by about the double. And just keep a close eye on him or any complaints that you may get.
If this doesn't sound convincing enough then just imagine how things will become once the core developers double in number! Without a sub-Dries things will look twice as bad for core developers as they are now. This is flagging a warning that we should heed.
On 7/1/07, Fernando Silva <fsilva.pt@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/1/07, Chad Phillips -- Apartment Lines <chad@apartmentlines.com> wrote:
Nedjo wrote:
There are very few members of our community who consistently meet these measures. Dries is one of them, and Drupal's success is due insignificant measure to that fact.
i agree. but let me suggest that there's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy going on here. i think more members of the community could meet the measures you outlined, if they were given the chance to assume the responsibility, make some mistakes, and learn.
Just to name a few: * more chx involvement * Bèr being taken more seriously * more support for decision made by robertDouglass and Kjartan
Anyway, the problem taking more people into core development is that there is not a "clear roadmap" to accept new core developers. The current situation can be resumed in some steps: * a developer starts using and developing drupal * until that developer makes some real good module (that should be in core) or "extraordinary something" it will not be "accepted" into core even if he lives to patch bugs * after acception based in meritocracy, there exists a small democracy based on "influence" * finally there is a monarchy to "rule them all"
These are the facts and, before anything else, one thing must be said: in this exact moment Drupal lives well, has fantastic developers and a guy that knows how to rule.
So where is the problem? Nowhere! There is no problem... yet. And is this small "yet" that should make some of the more influent guys around here think about.
Will Drupal community wait for a real problem, to solve it, or prepare the vaccine before the disease comes?
Dries already did that. Gabor Hojtsy is the co-committer for D6. Neil Drumm was for D5. Dries has done a good job so far. I think we should voice alternatives and let him decide how best to handle him. -- 2bits.com http://2bits.com Drupal development, customization and consulting.
A couple things here, and I also don't want to make this long: Dries started the project, Dries has grown the project, and Dries continues to make choices that allow Drupal to flourish. Dries isn't a bottleneck, he's a big part of the reason we can all spend our time on this list debating the merits of these different approaches. RE: "If this doesn't sound convincing enough then just imagine how things will become once the core developers double in number! Without a sub-Dries things will look twice as bad for core developers as they are now. This is flagging a warning that we should heed." The number of developers has more than doubled over the last few years -- we don't need to imagine this. This thread strikes me as one of the discussions that arises -- like a weed or a phoenix or a hangover that won't go away -- periodically -- threads like "Why is Drupal so hard for noobs", or "Drupal usability is terrible" -- while it is good to revisit topics like these on occasion, I don't think we should kid ourselves that we are breaking new ground here. Cheers, Bill Ashraf Amayreh wrote:
I really won't make it long, but with another person to give final decisions the RTBC queues would deplete faster, the workload on Dries would lessen, the patches going in to core would almost double, and everything will be swell for everyone.
Real leaders delegate and I have faith that Dries has or will in fact do that when he finds someone who can share this load. Unfortunately, Dries is the current bottleneck, not because he's not doing a splendid job but because he's a human who can't take the load no matter how hard he tries to prioritize.
Dries, why don't you choose a person and hold the right to revoke that authority from him if he goes off track? You'll really have to choose wisely but you will speed things by about the double. And just keep a close eye on him or any complaints that you may get.
If this doesn't sound convincing enough then just imagine how things will become once the core developers double in number! Without a sub-Dries things will look twice as bad for core developers as they are now. This is flagging a warning that we should heed.
On 7/1/07, *Fernando Silva* <fsilva.pt@gmail.com <mailto:fsilva.pt@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 7/1/07, Chad Phillips -- Apartment Lines <chad@apartmentlines.com <mailto:chad@apartmentlines.com>> wrote: > Nedjo wrote: > >> There are very few members of our community who consistently meet these >> measures. Dries is one of them, and Drupal's success is due insignificant >> measure to that fact. > > i agree. but let me suggest that there's a bit of a self-fulfilling > prophecy going on here. i think more members of the community could > meet the measures you outlined, if they were given the chance to > assume the responsibility, make some mistakes, and learn.
Just to name a few: * more chx involvement * Bèr being taken more seriously * more support for decision made by robertDouglass and Kjartan
Anyway, the problem taking more people into core development is that there is not a "clear roadmap" to accept new core developers. The current situation can be resumed in some steps: * a developer starts using and developing drupal * until that developer makes some real good module (that should be in core) or "extraordinary something" it will not be "accepted" into core even if he lives to patch bugs * after acception based in meritocracy, there exists a small democracy based on "influence" * finally there is a monarchy to "rule them all"
These are the facts and, before anything else, one thing must be said: in this exact moment Drupal lives well, has fantastic developers and a guy that knows how to rule.
So where is the problem? Nowhere! There is no problem... yet. And is this small "yet" that should make some of the more influent guys around here think about.
Will Drupal community wait for a real problem, to solve it, or prepare the vaccine before the disease comes?
-- Bill Fitzgerald http://www.funnymonkey.com Tools for Teachers 503.897.7160
Ashraf Amayreh skrev:
I really won't make it long, but with another person to give final decisions the RTBC queues would deplete faster, the workload on Dries would lessen, the patches going in to core would almost double, and everything will be swell for everyone.
To travesty Rob Landley at the Linux Kernel Mailing List: "A modest proposal -- We need a patch drupaller". This discussion reminds med about a very similar discussion in the Linux kernel community for more than five years ago. Maybe there is something to learn from that discussion and its outcome. See http://lkml.org/lkml/2002/1/28/83. Best regards, Thomas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Thomas Barregren schrieb:
Ashraf Amayreh skrev:
I really won't make it long, but with another person to give final decisions the RTBC queues would deplete faster, the workload on Dries would lessen, the patches going in to core would almost double, and everything will be swell for everyone.
To travesty Rob Landley at the Linux Kernel Mailing List: "A modest proposal -- We need a patch drupaller". This discussion reminds med about a very similar discussion in the Linux kernel community for more than five years ago. Maybe there is something to learn from that discussion and its outcome. See http://lkml.org/lkml/2002/1/28/83.
We've in effect already implemented a system such as the one proposed. A patch endorsed by people listed in MAINTAINERS.txt for their subsystem usually gets Dries' attention. Cheers, Gerhard -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGiMLUfg6TFvELooQRAtVwAKCaRYyCa1EdAXBsJcSudF9h21TecQCcCc1n fG/IrAREQ6JG9fhyvpHMhsA= =lXTZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (7)
-
Ashraf Amayreh -
Bill Fitzgerald -
Chad Phillips -- Apartment Lines -
Fernando Silva -
Gerhard Killesreiter -
Khalid Baheyeldin -
Thomas Barregren