Future frameworks releases

[Sebastian Kügler]

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 21:39:47 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 June 2015 05:19:57 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > Maybe you should just trust the amount of negative reactions (and the fact
> > that they come from /all the right people/ and forget about your proposal.
> > Trust the elders.
> 
> Seeing this argument being used by you, of all people, honestly makes me 
> nervous.
> 
> I know I used the "respect the elders" phrase in a keynote at Akademy.
> During  the QA, I got pointed at the risk of it, which I agreed to... but
> couldn't find a better wording.
> 
> In any case, the idea was that it was a cultural thing that I believe
> people  keep in mind in their interactions and I just pointed it was there.
> It is not meant as something someone could or should use as a different way
> to say "now please shut up and disappear".
> 
> Whatever I may think about the initial proposal, the counter-proposal or
> the  content of the discussion, I really don't like to see such a card
> played. It's the best way to drown all of us in formaldehyde.

On the other hand, we also consistently suck at decision-making when someone

Seeing this thread, the ratio pro/con of it, and the previous one which also 
dragged on forever, I wonder how much more energy we're going to waste.

Now Christian is a guy we can trust, but we have seen before that if there's 
not clear consensus in the sense of "100% of the stakeholders agree, not just 
99%), we keep wasting our energy on these discussion.

That's why I consciously pointed it out. I agree that it should be an 
exception, and not a way to shut someone up (that wasn't my intention anyway), 
but I wonder when enough of the people who really can judge this have given 
their opinion, and nothing new coming to the table, and it is indeed time to 
lay it to sleep and trust the people we know we can trust.

I've seen so much energy wasted in KDE for a lack of clear decision-making 
process, and we have been through multiple iterations of trying to fix it (the 
Technical Working Group, for example), and we haven't found a better model. 
It's a hard problem, and we haven't solved it, maybe it's unsolvable, but it 
should be OK to ask someone to apply the "trust model", even in case of 
disagreement, especially when the opinions are so clearly telling us. How many 
more emails that all say essentially the same are we going to waste on this? 
It's not a productive thing, and hasn't been for a while (no new arguments 
coming to the table), and it's starting to get harmful.

Let's not get too meta here, though.

Cheers,
-- 
sebas

Sebastian Kügler    |    http://vizZzion.org    |     http://kde.org