kdelibs coding style

[Friedrich W. H. Kossebau]

Am Montag, 24. Juli 2006 23:31, schrieb Zack Rusin:
> On Monday 24 July 2006 06:19, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > Or: Why did you sent your email to a mailing list if you are not
> > interested in the answers? Strange attitude IMHO. What would you
> > think if person X sends a proposal here and shows no interest to your
> > position if it does not fit intoher wants?
>
> Hmm, it's really unfortunate I have to be explaining this but the way
> discussions work is that when you ask a question, like in this case I
> wanted to hear opinion about accepting coding style for kdelibs, you
> would like to hear answers to that question, right? Not complains about
> wording or style that obviously can'tbe solved; not at this stage
> anyway.

Usually it is not really easy to decide about a base direction without 
thinking about the strings attached.

There isn't any question mark in your initial email, so for most the question 
is hidden in the term proposal. And aren't all emails in this thread on topic 
and answer to the full proposal, except for this metadiscussion? Some one 
details, but still with influence on answers to the proposal.

Things would have been different if you posted the first step question 
alone: "Are you for a coding style for kdelibs?" :) 

> The way you reach any kind of census in large groups is going step by
> step and we have to learn to do that.Stay on topic and follow
> discussion. Don't hijack my threads leading away from the main point.

For introducing a new census reaching method it should be made known to those 
involved, how could they else adhere to it? ;) 

> Lets agree on the basis before venturing into topics that are obviously
> going to be a lot more controversial.

So the one should start with a basic proposal. But didn't you present a fully 
developed solution, right with the first step?

> Otherwise like I said above, if you don't have the courtesy to respect
> my time and stay on topic, do not expect me to read carefully your
> emails.
>
> > So please get one other thing clear: There were some emails
> > suggesting discussing the style to pick (or if at all). With serious
> > thoughts. Thoughts that would like to be answered. And also were by
> > serious defenders of the proposal.
>
> Just to make it very clear, I put a lot of thought into my grocery list
> but I don't post it in response to your commit messages, do I? There's
> a place and time to post them, the bottom line here is to have respect
> for everyone's time and stay on topic(especially if they're pretty
> simple) instead of raising prematurely and unnecessarily hell.
>
> The rest of your email is based on a horrible fallacy so let me respond
> to that:
> > Never going to happen? So how did it come any decisions were ever
> > made?
>
> They haven't. "We" haven't reached decisions, what is happening time and
> time again is that a handful of strong individuals goes and does it.
>
> > Like when to switch to KDE4?
>
> Census in a decision never happened. 
>
> > To make no further KDE3.6 release?
>
> Census never happened.
>
> > Which build system to choose?
>
> Census never happened.
>
> > Repository software?
>
> Census never happened.

Less a fallacy. Didn't it never happen because a census was/is impossible? How 
should a census happen? Who is registered, how much weight does her vote 
have? 
KDE is a meritocracy, and it did scale so far, didn't it? 

> > Etc.?
>
> Go back to each and every one of those threads and see how they ended.
> They never really did. In each one ofthem there was at least a few
> people voicing usually rather silly objections. A few reasonable
> individuals just went ahead and did it. There never was a census.

Besides that the few people thought their objections not to be silly, yes, 
that is how it worked, and didn't it do it? The reasonable heard their active 
and interested fellows, took care of the feedback and then decided. And did, 
not to forget, the work! 

> > piss off that many people, because they were heard and had a chance
> > to influence. And usually accepted if they could not pursue enough
> > others (or those executing ;). At least in my perception.
>
> See and here you get it. So what you're saying is that if developer A
> and B go ahead and mass reindent kdelibs, that's OK because people had
> the chance to complain a bit, right? 

Yes. Because they would only do it if there was enough felt consensus. Or are 
your experiences different? 

> Again, that's very sad, 
> unfortunately, like I said, if we'll ever going to agree on anything we
> have to learn how stay on topic and answer questions.

And how to ask questions. :P

Still I think there have been a lot of working agreements in the history, 
already. 

Enough from me on this, it's time for people like Kevin, and you :)
Friedrich