Open Source: you're doing it wrong - the Pyjamas hijack

[anthony at xtfx.me]

On Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:06:47 AM UTC-5, james hedley wrote:
> > i have not banned anything, or even alluded to it, whatsoever.  i asked that
> > one specific mail not be commented upon
> 
> OK, sorry if I misunderstood, but that's still suppression in my book.

James, how can you realistically condemn a simple request with such colorful words, now and in previous messages, yet simultaneously claim to support Luke's many impositions ...

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pyjamas-dev/wK8f2XJQvlY/ZTK-9bZ5TisJ
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pyjamas-dev/wK8f2XJQvlY/xp63LbOYO6oJ

... i could easily drum up a hundred more, if i were both inclined and extremely bored.  i have been in contact by other users who claim a similar state as yourself, and frankly, everyone save yourself expresses a far more genuine interest ... your comments are riddled with dissonance ...

> > reading your accounts strewn about is interesting, what exactly are *your* motives?  
> 
> My motives are as I've stated; I'm a commercial user with products in development 
> which use Pyjamas and that I have a long-term stake in. With a bit of thought, anyone 
> should see why I value stability and continued viability. It's a long game but the
> potential payback to pyjamas could be huge *if* it can keep commercial users on board.
> This is where the existential threat to pyjamas comes from and why I and many others
> consider the takeover to be reckless and unjustified.

perhaps.  in retrospect i would have approached some aspects a bit differently.  interestingly ... things seem to be panning out in ways that will benefit all ... isn't that right, James?  to be honest though, of all the commercial users i'm aware, none have responded as you describe.

this was not a lone wolf operation, and neither are discussions in flight.  i think if you temper your reactions, and turn down the volume, you will find that things are shaping up rather well ... i am very much aware of the events unfolding, as are you.  whilst you paint me the enemy, new paths have been opened ... achievement? unlocked!

> > Luke is a talented developer, there is no doubt of this, but he is one of the most 
> > socially inept persons i have ever encountered
> 
> I don't think this is the right place to bash people or even defend them on a personal
> level.

i'm doing neither.  this is an mere observation after multiple years of interaction, and my own research into past endeavors.

> We get it though. You didn't get along with the guy.

well, no, i don't think you get it ... are you paying attention, at all?  i got along with him just fine; i've already detailed this elsewhere.

> > the idea was to retain Luke
> 
> I'm sorry but I don't believe this. Luke can speak for himself of course but this is
> not how you keep people on-board.

well, don't then :-(

... but several did, and it's the cross-my-heart-pinky-swear'in truth.  after many months of lengthy discussion it felt right.  after 10 minutes of reactionary thought it feels less right to you ... that's certainly understandable, and maybe even correct.  was it *really* the right thing to do? maybe not, this was unprecedented.  already however, great things are in motion, and i feel good about the feedback received, outside and in.

> > he decided to play legal threats as the first card 
> 
> He's claimed that you lifted data from his server without permission. I'm not commenting
> on that, but if it's true then this is a massive roadblock in the viability of the 
> project. I for one don't want to be involved in it. Can you picture the scene where a 
> developer or businessperaon goes into a meeting with very senior, very conservative 
> executives trying to pitch a product, and it turns out there are serious legal concerns
> surrounding the technology platform?

unrelated ... the technology is freely available.

> If it isn't true then perhaps you should put people's minds at rest by giving a detailed 
> explanation of the whole mail server situation, including where the data originated, where 
> it is now, how it got there and why the accidental mailing of so many people occurred.

acting as an agent of the organization, i reinstated services people had purposefully subscribed to, in accordance with an infrastructure transition.  these were pre-existing relationships to a service i managed.  alas, i was unaware of the reasons to -- or existence of -- joining a list, but opting for "nomail" ... thus the state was reset, ie. resuming reception thereto. following this realization, all existing members were simply requested to join a new list at their willful discretion. data was/is neither leaked nor compromised in any way.

if anything, organization leaders failed to register with the Ministry their collection of personal data, and also failed to train agents on proper handling, if need be.

... that's the official statement, but like i said 100 times, i don't give a {explicit deleted} about this, and never wanted to: i seek the best for everyone. this thought stream is more likely a shoot yourself in the foot kind of path ... and not my own.  while i do sincerely apologize to those affected/upset, the reality is a handful of people received a handful of mail, in a good faith attempt to reinstate a service they had both requested and retained.  this was subsequently ceased once it was clear there was an issue with the latter, and a final, good faith attempt was made to detail and offer resumed services elsewhere ...

so what?

lets hypothetically suggest there was some transgression, people/Luke/whomever feverishly pursue, and the book get thrown my way ... what will anyone have gained? nothing. all that results is my life gets difficult, my fiance in final year of grad school is possibly compromised due to finances, and my toddler son must endure any hardship along with us ... more blood please? or revenge? or [...]?

there is a positive resolution for everyone, and it will be found.

> > indeed, you have witnessed little chatter
> 
> I'd invite anyone to review the pyjamas list for the last 7 days before they make 
> up their minds. Some of the statements I've seen have been regrettable.

i don't know what you're referring to, or even talking about, at all.  things have been rather peachy keen ... we even had some emerge from the shadows! ;-)

> > by realizing this is not as black-and-white as you's like it to be. 
> 
> I have an ethical objection here, but moreover; it clearly just runs against my
> interests to support your actions. I'm not sure you considered the commercial users
> here, and with respect nor do I really get the impression you've understood it, still.

alright ... i *am* a commercial user.  while the events may run afoul something, it certainly isn't your interests.  when i give presentations, and early questions are not about the project, but some particular member, that signifies a problem ... i'll let you fill in the gaps.

> By the way; I'm not associated with Luke at all. I've emailed him off-list a few times
> this week to discuss some angles to do with my work, but that's it.

"it" you say? ok ...

> In fact, I support Kees' proposition that Pyjamas should seek sponsorship from the
> Python/Apache/Free Software Foundation. This would resolve questions of legitimacy and
> leadership.
> 
> In my ideal outcome, we could tailor pyjamas more to business use; e.g.
> tidying up any license issues, offering a commercial support contract (this will help
> mitigate the damage done to perceptions of credibility), publishing a commercial
> use policy (one of the foundations could offer support with this I hope).

oddly enough, your goals are inline with the advancements being made, and the some of the inadequacies behind the transition. understand that several inconsistencies were *introduced* by former leadership, and are only now being reconciled. regardless of your stance on the actual methods employed, you stand to benefit, and i daresay, *WILL* benefit. we are on the same side, James.

contingent upon acceptance of an agreeable resolution, i am more than happy to transfer assets to the PSF, so we can simply absolve each other and get back to writing some damn code. however, such decisions will be made with the same care and consideration as those which brought us here ... i'm not in a hurry to witness the very encumbrances i worked hard -- and received much flak -- be reinstated.  so far so good ... let's just continue working toward that goal, together.

i am tight on time and resources, so this is be my last correspondence here ... best to everyone.

-- 

C Anthony