Let's drop the 'ubuntu' clause

[sparkes]

Ben Edwards wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 09:29:37 +0000, sparkes <sparkes at westmids.biz> wrote:
> 
>>I know this is going to be unpopular, but I am not here to be popular
>>but to provide the best possible documentation for ubuntu.  So this is
>>me with ubuntu turned on but speaking for the best of the community.
>>Start of rant ;-)
>>
>>We need to stop using the ubuntu clause, you know when we say isn't that
>>the ubuntu way, in discussions.  I have done it myself and now regret
>>it.  Ben used it in the resent discussion and I am sure once he hears
>>what I am about to suggest he will have pangs of regret as well.
> 
> 
> It was a pun meant partly in humor - I didn't use the ubuntu strap -
> which is 'humanity to others' - I said 'Humility to others' - IMHO ;)

This certainly wasn't meant as an attact on anything you said.  It's 
more of the way we are going has the potential to lead nowhere in 
particular because we keep saying this instead of finding the right path.

I am pretty sure I was the first person to use it so I am to blame for 
it's early introduction ;-)
> 
>
>>
>>We need to find the *best* solution to problems, simpily *good enough*
>>should not be good enough for us.  We should strive for excellence.  We
>>are working on, what I believe, is currently the best linux distro and
>>is based on a strong free software stance.  Why should we weaken that
>>because we don't want to upset each other when reaching the best solution.
> 
> 
> I am afraid that the world is not a totally objective place.  There is
> no best solution for all of the people all of the time  - we cant
> oversimplify things by seeing everything as black or white.  Neither
> is it totally subjective.   I find intersubjectivety
> (http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Intersubjectivity.html)
> to be as a useful framework - although fundamentalists would disagree.
> 

lol, true.

But the right thing at any given point is objective.  It doesn't mean 
that the right thing can't change, it can and should evolve but we are 
starting to stagnate because sometimes the obvious answer (the currently 
technially best one) is overlooked for the wrong reasons.


>>
>>I doubt the developers of our upstream partners would think that
>>agreeing to follow a technically weak path when 'the right way' (tm) is
>>just as easy to follow is a good stratagy.  We have a good community but
>>by being nice to each other when we have such diametrically opposed view
>>points when we should find the right solution is weak.
> 
> 
> The rite way in whose opinion - I would never be so bold to say my way
> is the right way for everybody - in the real world where people want
> different things out of technology there can never be a best way - all
> you can hope for is a solution that works for most of the people most
> of the time or a set of solutions. Here we get into intersubjectivity
> again.

If we use 'the right way' as being the debian way ;-) lol, taking it off 
topic here ;-)

There is always a current best practise way and that is the right way 
until it is proved to be the wrong way.  It's not about opinion it's 
about subjectively looking at the reasoning behind choices and then 
making a group decision based on them.  We have a core team to make 
these choices and an active growing community to create rapid input and 
feedback keeping us on the right path.

I do see 'a set of solutions' as a solution in lots of cases but 
sometimes it causes problems.  Without wishing to go into the technical 
and out of the philosophical in this discussion I will just leave this 
point as unsaid ;-)  Sometimes there is only one right way and sometimes 
a couple of paths leading to the same place might be the best way forward.

> 
> Email lists and forums are a good examples.  Some find forums best,
> some email lists.  There is no write or wrong - providing both
> solutions is one way to go.

I think that lists are for people with a clue and forums are for people 
with too much time/bandwidth but that's a personal choice based on 
experience.  I certainly wouldn't say let's ditch forums because mailing 
lists are better because for some people mailing lists are clearly a 
problem.  So point taken about intersubjectivity here.

But when it comes to technical, rather than subjective arguements, there 
is always a current best practise that we should either agree on or 
agree to discover for ourselves.  Intersubjectivity aside technially we 
should be able to make a choice on best practise more often than we 
choose to disagree.  This does not limit freedom and you are not forced 
into working in a framework you do not agree with so don't get me wrong. 
  I am not supporting the limitation of choice but the exploration of 
best choice leading to a decision on how things should be done in a 
ideal world.

> 
> 
>>I am not saying that every discussion should have a winner and a loser.
>> I don't think in terms of winning and losing generally and think that
>>as long as the community grows from each discussion everybody wins.
> 
> 
> But surly if  subscribe that "we need to find the *best* solution to a
> problem" there must be a winning and loosing argument?
> 

nope.  Read hackers by Steven Levy (everyone should read that one) for 
my definition of winning and losing.  Everyone wins once agreement has 
been reached on best practise.  Thinking in terms of winning and losing 
a techical arguement is a losing process ;-)

all technical arguements become win/win once an acceptable best practise 
has been reached.  It doesn't matter how hard the road we travel getting 
to the top of the mountain, once you are there the view should be worth 
it ;-)

> 
>>Sometimes it's best to follow two stratagies.  I think the choice to
>>write two books is the best one for the community at the moment.  I
>>believe that we are best to start with debian docs and others don't.  As
>>the discussion progessed it was descided to gpl the new docs with the
>>immediate impact on the discussion that the arguement was over.  The
>>debian docs are gpl, the new docs are gpl.  We can combine the two at
>>any point to get a better solution.  Win win.
> 
> 
> Having 2 (or more) guides to Ubuntu enables us to have diferent guides
> aimed at different audiences.  The debian docs are good the
> technically minded people and hopefully the 'Using Ubuntu' book is for
> newbies and people who do not want, or are unable to, get technical. 
> Combining them later would just dilute the intent.  The key thing for
> any piece of communication/teaching is defining your audience and
> tailoring it for them  - therefore you will have different
> documentation covering the same subject for different audiences.

I didn't want to argue policy points here and not philosophy but I still 
can't see the problem here.  It's just a different (and IMHO better) 
starting point with the same end point.  We have docs that do 50% of 
what we need and just need to write 50% and then they benefit not just 
ubuntu but also debian.  It's a moot point because both docs are now gpl 
and the arguement win/win ;-)

> 
> If may well be useful to have good linking between the Debian docs and
> Using Ubuntu.  However I think we should have a separate
> non-intimidating newbie book which can be published in the traditional
> paper format.

The debian docs will be newbie friendly and under the terms of the gpl 
can be printed as well.  Again not really the place for this discussion 
expecially as it ended last week with a win/win situation ;-)

> 
> 
>>Unfortunatly the majority of discussions seem to be leading nowhere in
>>particular.  We discuss something, put off coming to an agreement until
>>the meeting and then go on our own ways doing our own things.  I can't
>>remember us making a decision on the list, perhaps this is just my
>>fubared memory.
> 
> 
> This does seem to be a problem - do we have clear set of decision
> making guidelines  - or is it the people with the passwords that
> ultimately decide;)

We have a good process in the CC and the TC we need to make that our own 
as well.  Then we have the same process across ubuntu land and enrico 
can take our decisions to CC meetings (and TC meeting on the rare 
occasions that this would be a better place) secure in the knowledge we 
are all singing off the same hyme sheet.

We do need to document the process.  Do we write our own policy doc 
based on the CC/TC and submit it to the CC for approval?  Enrico can you 
check on this situation for us please?

> 
> 
>>
>>Rant over ;-)
> 
> 
> I haven't had this much fun in ages!

Nor me, this is what I was talking about.  Getting to the best solution 
through active participation.  ;-)

See how far this has been taken in just two mailing list messages?

> 
> Ben
> 
>
sparkes