Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Welcome to the Monastery
 
PerlMonks  

Re^5: Perl 11

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Oct 25, 2018 at 01:30 UTC ( #1224639=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^4: Perl 11
in thread Perl 11

Kicking a genius out of p5p and off blogs.perl.org for technical criticism of other people's work is shameful and deeply offends my understanding of freedom of speech.

That's not what happened.

We would be better off if p5p was a ferocious sharktank of adult concepts rather than a kindergarten of childish hurt feelings.

I don't understand this hypothetical, because that's not what happened.

I don't know enough to take a side

But you did.

Let's go through a handful of Reini's claims. For example, from Overview of Current Maintainer Fails:

p5p refuses to take bug and security reports

That's nonsense. Easily refuted.

the toolchain is typically the gathering place for all the important people too incompetent to do core

That's an attack, backed up by... what exactly?

I've looked over all my >100 distroprefs patches, and in the end problems are only with ether and schmorp. schmorp at least knows what he is doing and eventually comes up with fixes by himself.

This is inconsistent with the previous approach, but clearly an attack on Karen. It's also backed up by... nothing.

The maintainer doesn't have an idea how compile-time vs run-time works

Same.

It's pretty hard to have faith in someone who decides 90% on the wrong side and only by luck sometimes makes a right decision.

Clearly an attack.

the p5p principles of ruling by incompetence, power and abuse are not tolerated

Same.

I could go on.

maybe some snowflakes need to stop melting when light hits them

I think it's more likely that volunteers don't want to take abuse from someone who refuses to communicate with anything other than abuse. There are only so many patches I'm likely to review if every comment is answered with "you're too stupid and incompetent to ask questions, just merge the patch or you're deliberately destroying something".

But what do I know, I'm only (as you say) far better informed on these matters.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Perl 11
by shmem (Chancellor) on Oct 25, 2018 at 09:24 UTC
    I could go on.

    Of course you could; but what for?

    IMHO the best attitude ist to filter out abuse by keeping in mind that they are talking to their own anger, and keep the bits that matter.

    I think it's more likely that volunteers don't want to take abuse from someone who refuses to communicate with anything other than abuse.

    Granted, but even somebody with Tourette syndrome might have something useful to say. As the linked article tells, it doesn't adversely affect intelligence.

    edit: I'm not saying nor believing anybody has tourette or any other disorder; I'm not skilled to diagnose nor could I do anything about it, if that where the case. Talking only about my attitude wrt abusive remarks.

    perl -le'print map{pack c,($-++?1:13)+ord}split//,ESEL'
      IMHO the best attitude ist to filter out abuse by keeping in mind that they are talking to their own anger, and keep the bits that matter.

      p5p's goal isn't to build the finest, most technically excellent, most advanced piece of software at any point in time.

      p5p's goal is to build something that lasts.

      A handful of features have been delayed or backed out before being released in stable form or even removed because they threatened the stability of the language, the integrity of the CPAN, or the stability of enough code in the wild that they presented an untenable risk to the future of Perl.

      Technically good patches have been rejected because they don't have sufficient documentation or tests or comments such that they risk maintenance problems for the future of the codebase.

      In much the same way, allowing abuse and vitriol that is completely unnecessary and completely optional and completely controllable threatens the integrity of the project itself. Multiple contributors have walked away from p5p for short and long periods of time because of abuse from Reini and Marc.

      p5p is optimizing for something that lasts, and requiring contributors to avoid personal attacks is part of that process.

        p5p is optimizing for something that lasts, and requiring contributors to avoid personal attacks is part of that process.

        This really resonates and shifts my outsider perspective a little into what I think is a better vantage.

        "Poisonous people will show up and distract your developers from productive work. They cause emotional drain because they'll start infighting or squabbling or that sort of thing. What they do is basically: you're going down a certain road and they're going to either stop you, slow you down, or try and turn you off a different road. Some people will do this on purpose, some people will do this by accident.... These people who will disrupt your progress are not always doing it intentionally, in fact I think more often they're doing it unintentionally. They're so into the project and they want it to be so perfect that they will actually end up hurting you with their perfectionism."

        --How Open Source Projects Survive Poisonous People:
        www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE


        "The other thing that's going on, which I think is very troubling, is the gangsterization of American politics that has occurred really in the last 10 years. By the gangsterization of American politics I mean this: It is the idea that the person who disagrees with you isn't your critic, he's your enemy. You have to shut him up, or take him out."

        --Dinesh D'Souza (Yesterday): youtu.be/Mh36aKNVEJA?t=1619


        Best wishes to p5p, and the critics... May Perl always prosper!
        > p5p's goal isn't to build the finest, most technically excellent, most advanced piece of software at any point in time.

        Good point, but whose goal is it?

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice

Re^6: Perl 11
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 25, 2018 at 03:53 UTC
    Why charcterize criticism as an "attack"? Naming and shaming subjects of criticism is a venerable intellectual tradition. An attack implies something quite violent, or unreasonable, but these are merely critiques. He's like the Yelp of p5p.
      the toolchain is typically the gathering place for all the important people too incompetent to do core

    That's an attack, backed up by... what exactly?

    That's an attack? It sounds like truth to me. When I first read that statement it was like looking in a mirror, because I would definitely be gathering on the toolchain with my fellow incompetents wrt the core.


      p5p refuses to take bug and security reports
    That's nonsense. Easily refuted.

    But that's not the only fork of Perl done for the same reasons:

      "Here it finally is, stableperl, an attempt to restore perl stability and compatibility to the level mentioned in the official perl policy."

      "It is also an attempt to fix some of the more obvious bugs that affect many programs and which the perl 5 porters refuse to fix, foremost hash performance and data corruption during global destruction."

      "Lastly, and most theoretically, it is a safeguard against perl 5 porters breaking perl 5 to the point where it is no longer usable - when or if that happens, stableperl can be use to achieve independence."

    blog.schmorp.de/2015-06-06-a-stable-perl.html


    I think it's more likely that volunteers don't want to take abuse from someone who refuses to communicate with anything other than abuse. There are only so many patches I'm likely to review if every comment is answered with "you're too stupid and incompetent to ask questions, just merge the patch or you're deliberately destroying something".

    If that was indeed the case then we're on the same page. I just find it odd that "the bad guys" who left p5p to fork Perl are fixing bugs and innovating far beyond what p5p offers, if their critique is completely untrue. I curse p5p every time I have to fix something they broke, and Larry's own son had to roll his own too: github.com/quietfanatic/notebook/blob/master/lib/cgi.pm

    Thank you for taking the time to fill in some of the blanks.

      Why charcterize criticism as an "attack"? Naming and shaming subjects of criticism is a venerable intellectual tradition. An attack implies something quite violent, or unreasonable, but these are merely critiques.

      Wrong.

      if their critique is completely untrue

      That's not what I wrote.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1224639]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (3)
As of 2020-10-22 00:56 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    My favourite web site is:












    Results (225 votes). Check out past polls.

    Notices?