[ANNOUNCE] dh_splitpackage 0.1

[Scott Kitterman]

On Saturday, June 04, 2011 12:36:08 PM Daniel Holbach wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> 
> Am 04.06.2011 05:00, schrieb Scott Kitterman:
> > I fail to find any evidence in Evan's reply that he thought otherwise.  I
> > find it quite odd that you are so certain of it.  It may not be clear to
> > you, but Ubuntu and Canonical are not at all the same thing.
> 
> AFAIK Zygmunt contributed to Ubuntu since 2005 and was only hired into
> Canonical some time last year. I'm quite sure he's well aware what
> Canonical is and what Ubuntu is.

I'm quite encouraged by Zygmunt's latest reply in the thread.  It's more like 
the reply I would have hoped came in response to Evan's mail.

> > My impression is that for that to be possible it probably needs a
> > different author.  You don't appear to have any interest in
> > collaboration to improve things for the greater benefit.  I see you've
> > had some involvement in Ubuntu for some time and are an Ubuntu Member,
> > so I think you should know you are not working with people the way we
> > try to do in Ubuntu.  When I read your initial message I thought it
> > sounded interesting.  I'm not interested anymore.
> 
> The message this sends out is "if you don't go the whole nine yards,
> you're not with us", which I don't agree with.

I disagree.  

> In a lot of cases in the open source world somebody proposed a solution
> to part of a bigger problem and even if they chose not to completely
> generalise it, upstream it, etc., it helped others to pave the way for a
> more general solution. It would be great if all proposed changes in the
> world landed upstream first and in a general way, but I don't think it's
> a fair a priori expectation.

I think you are putting words in my mouth now.

> This exchange does not only alienate Zygmunt, but also future
> contributors who happen to read this. Everybody is entitled to be of the
> opinion that solutions are worthless if they don't generally fix all the
> related bugs, but you don't speak for me.

That isn't what I said at all.  Personally I find this kind of response to 
attack someone who's calling someone on unacceptable behavior demotivating.

> Ubuntu is different because we invite people to share their ideas and we
> welcome people in. Dismissing a helpful developer is unproductive and
> more importantly actively damaging to the project.

I'm not sure who the helpful developer you're referring to is?  Blasting 
someone who offers suggestions about how best to get one's work incorporated 
into Ubuntu is not, IMO, helpful.  I see in another part of this thread that 
Zygmunt is going to work with the Debhelper upstream to see if this can be 
incorporated.  I think that's very good news.

> Ironically enough it proves a point in Zygmunt's earlier message about
> how hard it is to contribute to Debian/Ubuntu and this perception will
> stay.

I disagree.  I think that sitting idly by while people are hostile and 
negative makes the environment more difficult for everyone.  Instead of a long 
rant attacking Ubuntu and Debian, Zygmunt could have just said he wasn't 
interested in doing that work, but he didn't.  He went on the attack and I 
think it's unreasonable for you to attack me for calling him on it.

> > Fortunately your response to his helpful suggestion
> > has reduced the risk you'll ever be inconvenineced by such responses
> > again.
> 
> 6 emails into the thread, what have we achieved?
> 
> Positive:
>  + a script shared that solves a specific problem,
>  + some background on what would be necessary to fix the problem more
>    generally and some info about what might be debhelper upstream's
>    expectations.
    + The script author expressing a willingness to work with Debhelper on
       this
> 
> Negative:
>  - some confusion about email addresses,
>  - a lasting impression that contributing to Debian and Ubuntu is hard
>    and you might get flamed if you share your work but might be too
>    busy to fully generalise it, etc etc.
   - Ubuntu developers getting flamed for upholding project values
   - At least one Ubuntu developer feeling like the Canonical community team
     is more committed to Canonical employees than Ubuntu.
> 
> Can we please go back to square 1 and can those who are interested in
> the problems that are solved (or partly solved) by Zygmunt have a
> conversation that is goal-oriented instead? I'm sure Zygmunt is happy to
> answer questions about how his code works and which considerations
> exactly led to it.

I'm happy to take a step back and consider a better path forward.  I think 
Zygmunt's reply to maco is very encouraging.

Scott K