[oe] Fwd: [oe-commits] org.oe.dev apm: turn off wifi cards before suspend so they are fully reloaded upon resume. closes 3664.

[Mike (mwester)]

"Paul Sokolovsky" <pmiscml at gmail.com> writes:
[snip]
>  IMHO, the problem here is not how to make it more comfortable for
> individual developers to contribute to OE - that's big question in
> itself, but answers to it are mostly bound to general properties of
> OpenSource projects (the bigger they become, the steeper participation
> curve, unfortunately ;-( ).

No. Quite wrong, in fact.  The problem is not inherent in a project just 
because the project has a large scope.  Civility and courtesy can be 
maintained, regardless of size of project.  Nobody is questioning that large 
projects have special issues and challenges; rather the issue is how you 
chose to phrase your response to the commit in this case, compared to how it 
might have been presented in a more positive and constructive way.

>  IMHO, the talk is about how to be on the same direction, and even
> steering, where OE goes. There're many meta-level changes are being
> done to OE, and it's hard for everyone to be current with all of them.
> Yet even more important meta-changes cannot be done literally for
> years (packages staging for example), because of lack participation
> and inertness of developers.

Irrelevant.  This is true, but this has nothing whatever to do with respect 
and common courtesy.

>  With all that in mind, IMHO, it's not too productive to keep silent
> instead of participating in communication, and actual meta-work. And
> per well-known rules of nature, law of compensation comes into play -
> if someone keeps silent, someone has to be more vocal; if someone
> thinks and finds that it's easiser to do less that otherwise would
> be possible, someone else thinks and finds that more has to be done.

Which is all the more reason for the OE community to make the effort to (as 
you put it) "make it more comfortable...to contribute to OE".  I applaud the 
OE developers who are civil, respectful, and constructive -- I think those 
contributors are doing more to ensuring the long-term success of the project 
than are those who may (arguably) be correct but silence others by the 
manner in which they choose to correct.

Mike (mwester)