[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Disputes between developers - content, draft #4

>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk> writes:

 Ian> I think you must have a different experience to me.  I've found
 Ian> that many developers don't seem to share enough of the context
 Ian> and unspoken rules.

	I agree that develoeprs may come from different cultures and
 contexts -- but humans have been herd animals ancestors since pre
 Homo Afarensis, and the ability to interact in a social group is a
 common trait amongst human tribes.

 Ian> I think writing them down will help.  I

	Going down and writing  too musch simplitic detail loses the
 relevant content in a forest of inanity.

 Ian> also think it might produce some useful pressure on those people
 Ian> who ought to know better but lapse occasionally.  (And I'm not
 Ian> excluding myself here.)

 Ian> If you still disagree with me on this, I don't really see that I'm
 Ian> going to make much headway with addressing that point, because it's a
 Ian> fundamental part of the purpose and style of what I'm trying to
 Ian> achieve - ie, I don't think I'd do justice to your opinions even if I
 Ian> put aside my disagreement.

	Since I do still disagree, I suspect that this shuts out most
 of my contribution to your document. 

 Ian> It's also really difficult to have a sensible conversation about these
 Ian> questions, because they are so subjective.

 Ian> I would say: does it really hurt so much to have a few platitudes, and
 Ian> some motherhood and apple pie ?  It seems that you're not actually
 Ian> disagreeing with what's said, but just saying that it shouldn't be
 Ian> said at all even though it's true - which seems strange to me.

	It is a matter of presentation. A guide book on ettiquette
 needs to get the buy in of the people that are supposed to accept and
 follow it (unless it is meant to be rammed down the projects throat
 by fiat). And large tracts that irritate people (well, they irritate
 me, and I am projecting that I am not the only one), then the whole
 document stands in danger of being dismissed.

 Ian> My experience is that sensible conversations about eg bug
 Ian> reports can easily become derailed by categorical statements
 Ian> like that by the maintainer.  The results are often that the
 Ian> submitter just gets angry, and things go downhill from there.

	Yes. But I contend that there are still situations where a
 categorical statement _is_ the only correct response -- and I do
 think that there are scenrarios where being up front an honest rather
 then equivocating in order not to ``hurt'' feeling is better. I am
 not advocating one needs be abrasive and in your face. 

	Can we just tone down the paragraph, and state instead that in
 most cases, one should examine the issue with care before making
 categorical statements, since often categorical statements made in
 the heat of debate may lock one in an untenable position when tempers

 Ian> So, I strongly disagree - I think these comments are important, and
 Ian> the fact that you disagree with them shows that at least they're not
 Ian> content-free ...

	The difference is mostly one of presentation, and how
 condescending the paragraph appears.  Reasonable people, current
 company included, have made similar errors. Talking down to them like
 they are social misfits rubs people the wrong way.

 >> > 6. Bug report etiquette

 Ian> I've run out of time for this in-detail writing now, but I'll deal
 Ian> with this section of your mail later.

 Trailing Edge Technologies is pleased to announce the following
 TETflame programme: For a negotiated price (no quatloos accepted) one
 of our flaming representatives will flame the living shit out of the
 poster of your choice. The price is inversly proportional to how much
 of an asshole the target it. We cannot be convinced to flame Dennis
 Ritchie. Matt Crawford flames are free.  For a negotiated price (same
 arrangement) the TETflame programme is offering ``flame
 insurence''. Under this arrangement, if one of our policy holders is
 flamed, we will cancel the offending article and flame the flamer, to
 a crisp.  The TETflame flaming representatives include: Richard
 Sexton, Oleg Kisalev, Diane Holt, Trish O'Tauma, Dave Hill, Greg
 Nowak and our most recent aquisition, Keith Doyle. But all he will do
 is put you in his kill file. Weemba by special arrangement.  Richard
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: