OpenMandriva

[rolf]

@ dedanna: Your description of what is happening is far from what I perceived and, as I have read all the postings to the foundation list, whereas you have not, I think you should not be so quick to assume motivations or attempt to state facts not in existence. As I said, I don't buy the picture of OMA unilaterally taking over devs work. They were doing necessary things for a necessary process, parallel to development work, and got shit on. I see devs egos as being, at least, partially responsible for a lack of cooperation, which is nothing new.

@ Per: It's very difficult to follow your James Joyce-type of accounting. I appreciate you have been through a lot, that it's difficult to express all the relevant nuances of a complex history but, for one thing, I don't see where what you and Wobo and Moro are accusing Schultz of doing, of being is justified. All we have is more he said, she said. There is a principle of facing your accuser that is not active in such discussions, so far, and there is little but veiled references and innuendo, not specifics sufficient for me to draw any conclusion.

Maybe it will get pulled together. I see that Kate, Moro, and Bero, at least, seem to be trying to get the show back on track.

[proyvind]

Well, I see my last post is of the sort of offensive, disrespectful, emotional rant that I was objecting to, sorry. The best I can try to do is make some more objective observations.

• I've read the community list from the beginning of June 2012. What I've observed is that {Mandriva|ROSA|whoever has acquired the Mandriva properties} took steps to provide for the formation of an entity/foundation to own and operate a community branch of the distribution.
  http://blog.mandriva.com/en/2012/06/01/ ... versation/
  http://blog.mandriva.com/en/2012/06/
• I didn't perceive any "hidden agenda" on the part of Charles Schultz or Mandriva and was puzzled by the animosity displayed toward him by certain of the long-time Mandriva contributors.
• Much volunteer work was done by non-dev community members, along with devs or, at least, not excluding devs.
• All that I saw seemed an earnest effort to comply with the initial goals/requirements to form a legal entity in order to take possession of a community branch of the Mandriva code base/relevant properties. It was a slow process, with many bodies working on it, but the official entity was approved beginning of January 2013.
  http://blog.mandrivalinux.org/2013/01/o ... orporated/
• Again, discussions and work by non-dev volunteers about webservers, website software, distro names, graphical logos, etc. continued with heartfelt and not inconsequential devotion by motivated community members until this last week.
• It appears that Per took offense at a perceived defiance of his authority to do what he wanted with the release where the non-devs had been developing other ideas, such as art work. Adding fuel to the fire, he made some heated claims about ROSA failing to pay him on schedule. Some counter claims by Kate lead me not to take any of the claims as gospel but there is evidence of contributory friction from that.
• Per did make some offensive and inflammatory remarks about the non-dev side of community, appearing to reject all the work and legitimacy of those who had worked with good intentions for most of a year to bring the transition to its current state.
• Per solicits Bruce Perens who, afaict, comes to the controversy primed by Per's version of all that has gone before. I am suspect, therefore, of his objectivity and whether his input will be positive. Something remains to be seen.
• One who has devoted much of his time and obvious love of FOSS to birthing OMA, João Azevedo Patrício, was offended enough by Per's attacks of the work of community to date that he bowed out.
  https://ml.mandriva.com/wws/arc/foundat ... 00328.html
  

No one has to explain to me that there is no distribution without the developers; I've been around this phenomenon more than 10 years. There can be distribution that only serves devs but that is not the case for what is happening here. Per is (finally) paid for what he does and he is not denied his voice. However, it appears to me that he, g.moro, perhaps others are railing against an injustice that does not exist, that they are unwilling to meet halfway on what is, in the reality of *this* distribution, a two-way street.

word my grandmother dislikes, I wrote a quite well-detailed reply to all of this, yet my session timed out before I was finished writing and I forgot to make a copy of it first, so I won't start writing it all over again (could this timeout limit been increased considerably??)..

Most of the the things here I've already kinda touched already in previous post of mine, so I won't spend anymore time on writing a detailed answer to each of yer point in your list, except than stating that I've not seen anything contributed to the distribution from the association so far (logos for the association to vote on doesn't count for "artwork" btw.) nor involvement in it, it's rather drained it's energy and time and been more focused on how to get to rule it rather than caring for it, without any will to accept any of the realities repeatedly explained..

So I'll just quote Bruce in stead:

Foundations for Open Source projects are a support team for the developers. Not some completely separate activity, and not their bosses. You don't get to say, as Raphael Jadot did yesterday, that they can all walk off if they don't like your direction. It's their project, not yours.

https://ml.mandriva.com/wws/arc/foundat ... 00342.html

[proyvind]

@ dedanna: Your description of what is happening is far from what I perceived and, as I have read all the postings to the foundation list, whereas you have not, I think you should not be so quick to assume motivations or attempt to state facts not in existence. As I said, I don't buy the picture of OMA unilaterally taking over devs work. They were doing necessary things for a necessary process, parallel to development work, and got shit on. I see devs egos as being, at least, partially responsible for a lack of cooperation, which is nothing new.

@ Per: It's very difficult to follow your James Joyce-type of accounting. I appreciate you have been through a lot, that it's difficult to express all the relevant nuances of a complex history but, for one thing, I don't see where what you and Wobo and Moro are accusing Schultz of doing, of being is justified. All we have is more he said, she said. There is a principle of facing your accuser that is not active in such discussions, so far, and there is little but veiled references and innuendo, not specifics sufficient for me to draw any conclusion.

Maybe it will get pulled together. I see that Kate, Moro, and Bero, at least, seem to be trying to get the show back on track.

So basically you're implying me being a liar just because discussions you haven't been involved with or follow internal discussions?

I'll refrain to comment much on egos, or the fragility of for some..

If you have more trust and confidence in someone which has no merits to show for with regards to this project, and that everyone involved with obviously dislikes, then that's your right which you're fully entitled to, but it doesn't change reality regardless of.

And for Charles' popularity and credibility, he only received half of the votes of anyone else for the council, just barely sufficient for him to become part of it..
You think that's a pure coincidence?

And as written before, there's a reason of why Kate was brought in, it was because of Mandriva's failure and incompetence at trying to succeed at what Charles was supposed to be responsible for. You don't think she appeared after several months to take over the responsibilities just for no reason, do you?

[rolf]

"Foundations for Open Source projects are a support team for the developers. Not some completely separate activity, and not their bosses. You don't get to say, as Raphael Jadot did yesterday, that they can all walk off if they don't like your direction. It's their project, not yours."

Perens can claim that Raphael said that but I don't see where he said that. Why don't you cite what Raphael said, directly? All of what Perens said, here and elsewhere, is his rhetorical slant. As with so much of this discussion, that he claims something doesn't make it so.

You claim yourself to be too busy to read all the lists, which makes sense. Again, there was considerable necessary work done to make the foundation rules, structure, process, as well as setting up infrastructure, build system, coordination with abf. It is yet unfinished, a work in progress. I've read all the posts. I've seen evidence of substantial, valuable work. That you claim otherwise is evidence of your lack of exposure to the mailings that discuss these things and, moreso, is becoming to appear part of a pattern of gratuitous slander to shape public opinion, to disrupt attempts to form the governing bodies, as was laid out in the beginning.

Absent more explicit credible evidence to the contrary, the appearance is that you and Perens are purposefully oblivious to the non-devel work that has been earnestly accomplished, without the malice you impugn. IOW, your slant doesn't cut it, for me.

[rolf]

"So basically you're implying me being a liar just because discussions you haven't been involved with or follow internal discussions?"

I say that the evidence of my eyes does not lead me to believe everything that is said, including what you say. Again, with indirect allusions to secret knowledge, without particulars. I'm not sure whose fragile ego your further sideways, uninformative denigration is supposed to address but name-calling and passive-aggressive insinuations are not compelling. Not to me.

As for Kate Lebedeff and the implication of her hiring, she seems very helpful and whether her presence is due to another in a long history of Mandriva's shortcomings is of no consequence. In fact, she seems to not not be swallowing your slant altogether, either...

Dear Per
I can only regret, that you do not see other comments, which were made in the same direction.
I am not speaking for others now or before, I am referring to particular situations, which we discussed with you earlier.
>
> You again escalating it further and telling that you no longer want to assist me in getting my salary (something which you had taken on as your responsiblity
Per, once again. I never took such a responsibility, this is just not possible, I am not a part of your contract in any way, neither am I a Rosa employee, responsible person or speaker.
What you do now - you are simply blocking me from any further help, which I possibly still could give, despite all this discussion.
After you attributed me so many things, which I never said or did, I see it very hard to speak to Rosa on your behalf. As it shows, we simply see the matter in the different way. When you say I am obliged to do certain things... well. Furthermore, that I am unprofessional.. OK, that's your view, you have the right for it. When you say there was an ultimatum discussed?... I wonder where from you took this. Definitely not from me.
I interfered last year, since I thought that some miscommunication and payment delays could be eliminated with russian language speaker, dealing with administrative things. This was my pure good will to try and help. I am not obliged to do this in any way. And interference did help to eliminate certain misunderstandings - not full scale, but the situation became better.
What you start saying - hardly has reference to me or my actions.

-from this long thread, starting here: https://listes.lautre.net/pipermail/oma ... 00180.html

In short, frankly, I am finding your 'cause' to be lacking in maturity or merit, in some significant part.

[proyvind]

"Foundations for Open Source projects are a support team for the developers. Not some completely separate activity, and not their bosses. You don't get to say, as Raphael Jadot did yesterday, that they can all walk off if they don't like your direction. It's their project, not yours."

Perens can claim that Raphael said that but I don't see where he said that. Why don't you cite what Raphael said, directly? All of what Perens said, here and elsewhere, is his rhetorical slant. As with so much of this discussion, that he claims something doesn't make it so.

You claim yourself to be too busy to read all the lists, which makes sense. Again, there was considerable necessary work done to make the foundation rules, structure, process, as well as setting up infrastructure, build system, coordination with abf. It is yet unfinished, a work in progress. I've read all the posts. I've seen evidence of substantial, valuable work. That you claim otherwise is evidence of your lack of exposure to the mailings that discuss these things and, moreso, is becoming to appear part of a pattern of gratuitous slander to shape public opinion, to disrupt attempts to form the governing bodies, as was laid out in the beginning.

Absent more explicit credible evidence to the contrary, the appearance is that you and Perens are purposefully oblivious to the non-devel work that has been earnestly accomplished, without the malice you impugn. IOW, your slant doesn't cut it, for me.

What Raphael said isn't of any relevance, what Bruce said is an universal truth regardless of.

You chose not to take any of my advice or criticism into account, failed entirely at properly involving the actual developers despite of me repeatedly telling to do so and pointing to cooker as being the suitable place for discussions.

You've created an association, great for you, but what's it's value now unless you get those who actually does the distribution onboard?

You can point fingers and blame me as much as you'd like, but that's not really a very efficient tactic at trying to make us join and be controlled by something we don't recognize as fit to do so.

[proyvind]

"So basically you're implying me being a liar just because discussions you haven't been involved with or follow internal discussions?"

I say that the evidence of my eyes does not lead me to believe everything that is said, including what you say. Again, with indirect allusions to secret knowledge, without particulars. I'm not sure whose fragile ego your further sideways, uninformative denigration is supposed to address but name-calling and passive-aggressive insinuations are not compelling. Not to me.

As for Kate Lebedeff and the implication of her hiring, she seems very helpful and whether her presence is due to another in a long history of Mandriva's shortcomings is of no consequence. In fact, she seems to not not be swallowing your slant altogether, either...

Dear Per
I can only regret, that you do not see other comments, which were made in the same direction.
I am not speaking for others now or before, I am referring to particular situations, which we discussed with you earlier.
>
> You again escalating it further and telling that you no longer want to assist me in getting my salary (something which you had taken on as your responsiblity
Per, once again. I never took such a responsibility, this is just not possible, I am not a part of your contract in any way, neither am I a Rosa employee, responsible person or speaker.
What you do now - you are simply blocking me from any further help, which I possibly still could give, despite all this discussion.
After you attributed me so many things, which I never said or did, I see it very hard to speak to Rosa on your behalf. As it shows, we simply see the matter in the different way. When you say I am obliged to do certain things... well. Furthermore, that I am unprofessional.. OK, that's your view, you have the right for it. When you say there was an ultimatum discussed?... I wonder where from you took this. Definitely not from me.
I interfered last year, since I thought that some miscommunication and payment delays could be eliminated with russian language speaker, dealing with administrative things. This was my pure good will to try and help. I am not obliged to do this in any way. And interference did help to eliminate certain misunderstandings - not full scale, but the situation became better.
What you start saying - hardly has reference to me or my actions.

-from this long thread, starting here: https://listes.lautre.net/pipermail/oma ... 00180.html

In short, frankly, I am finding your 'cause' to be lacking in maturity or merit, in some significant part.

I don't see the relevance of this or what you're trying to get at here..

Care to explain?

[rolf]

"You can point fingers and blame me as much as you'd like, but that's not really a very efficient tactic at trying to make us join and be controlled by something we don't recognize as fit to do so."

I've done nothing but observe. I'm not trying to make anyone do anything. I don't see evidence for the transgressions at which *your* finger has been pointing. Show me the words where you and other developers were denied a hearing of your input. What I *have* seen from you appears to be refusal to accept the non-technical workers, at all.

I'm saying, "So what Mandriva came up short, yet again, and Kate was brought in to improve the situation? So what?" Imperfection is the norm, for some time, and *everybody* who supports this distribution deals with that in some way. It's not news.

WRT the citations of Kate's words, I am saying, having read the entire exchange, there, is you come off as exaggerating and mis-representing events, which goes to the credibility of your claims. Taken together with your tendency to insinuate aspersions in lieu of factual statement, it makes what you say more suspect.

[proyvind]

"You can point fingers and blame me as much as you'd like, but that's not really a very efficient tactic at trying to make us join and be controlled by something we don't recognize as fit to do so."

I've done nothing but observe. I'm not trying to make anyone do anything. I don't see evidence for the transgressions at which *your* finger has been pointing. Show me the words where you and other developers were denied a hearing of your input. What I *have* seen from you appears to be refusal to accept the non-technical workers, at all.

I'm saying, "So what Mandriva came up short, yet again, and Kate was brought in to improve the situation? So what?" Imperfection is the norm, for some time, and *everybody* who supports this distribution deals with that in some way. It's not news.

WRT the citations of Kate's words, I am saying, having read the entire exchange, there, is you come off as exaggerating and mis-representing events, which goes to the credibility of your claims. Taken together with your tendency to insinuate aspersions in lieu of factual statement, it makes what you say more suspect.

This is just a truly awful attempt of ad hominem personal attack, over that I try to explain why people dislike Charles which you yourself bring up and is wondering about. You yourself dismiss anything that's not visible to you in public, yet you're trying to reference a totally out of context thread where the subject referred to most certainly isn't public or of any of your concern.

Getta grip.

Please start with explaining exactly what and how the association has contributed to the distribution so far, and why you think that it should govern development based on this.

I see none.

And for your rationale about you supporting the distributions should give you the right to participate in making decissions for it isn't much more sane than if a football supporter demanded to play or coach the team based on supporting it.

[viking60]

word my grandmother dislikes, I wrote a quite well-detailed reply to all of this, yet my session timed out before I was finished writing and I forgot to make a copy of it first, so I won't start writing it all over again (could this timeout limit been increased considerably??)..l

Done!

And for your rationale about you supporting the distributions should give you the right to participate in making decissions for it isn't much more sane than if a football supporter demanded to play or coach the team based on supporting it.

Oh c'mon that is the Gnome dev attitude that will leave all devs to develop stuff only for themselves or to jump ship to Mac. I like Bayern Munchen because they play atractive and efficient Fotball and Bareclona at its best is art.
Fyllingsdalen il (no offence!) might have an empty seat for my arse - but you will not find it there unless they serve spectacular waffles. What you are serving here does not taste that well.
So the principle of participation is important to Linux and the freedom of choiche is as well. So even if I agree that the devs must make the most decisions - they must present something that someone wants to use.
The chances for that do increase with some participation on some level if you ask me.
But if Mandriva 2013 comes out like Bayern Munchen or Barcelona it does not matter because I will be a supporter anyway.

[dedanna1029]

@viking,
Do you not think that art work, and other things that may or may not have been done, are putting the horse before the cart?
Even you said they should get the distro at least going before they name it (association and distro-wise is what I assumed there), no paperwork even, just go for the distro is what I read into that as well.

Well, Per did, and has been since long before that post, no one else saw fit to help build the distro, so Per's slammed for it?

This all makes no sense to me.

I'd also like to remind you of this post here, wherein part of the discussion was Per working alone?

I do not get the attitudes.
Yes, Open Source is everyone joining in, doing whatever, but I'd like to raise the question as well, "What has anyone else done?" In reference to the part you quoted there, what Per meant, is who else is qualified to do the dev part of the distro? No one's stepped up to the plate, and that needs to be something that people work on based on merit, not for sh!ts and giggles, because it's such a crucial component of the distro. Right now, he's the only one that has that merit, for the dev portion. I dare anyone right now to even be able to join in to help with it, because it's so close to the finish line. They'd have to learn everything already done, and know how/where to go from there.
I wish them luck, if they don't have that merit.

[dedanna1029]

TBPH, if I were Per, I'd take that baby, and make my own fork out of it, and not have it for OpenMandriva, quit ROSA and everything else to do with this project, let OpenMandriva hire the devs they want to write the distro they want, then there's none of this power trip on anyone's side (meaning Per wouldn't even be involved in any power struggle).

Yup, I damn sure would. Let OpenMandriva fight it out amongst themselves, they are going to anyway. There will be the same power struggle shit that's there now, Per or no Per. Doesn't matter. The thing will still be bickered over, the thing will still be in the SOS. I'd say let them have it.

You guys are quite right. He wasn't hired to write this thing by himself. So, I'd say bye-bye, and would have long ago, without that help. There. Problem solved. Now, OpenMandriva, go build your own damn distro.