Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wayland/Weston Gets Forked As "GH-Next"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by brosis View Post
    Wait, wasn't Ubuntu doing exactly that?

    ---

    Personally I find this idea huge waste of effort.

    It would be a lot nicer, if the guy just did one single post describing all contributions he made, time and effort it took to submit and reason why there were not accepted.

    That would place the ironsights exactly on the problem.


    Instead ... effort has split, and we have just another graphics system,.. wonderful for confusing beginner contributors and distro developers.
    I am not criticizing him though, its still a decent decision.
    So who's time and effort is he wasting? Is his time and effort yours?

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by timothyja View Post
      Again as I said in my initial post I totally understand where he is coming from. Your last sentence highlights the huge problem with FOSS currently and is what's causing his and others such as myself frustration. Unlike the pretty picture of community based open source projects that is told to young software developers at bed time the real landscape for most FOSS projects is a bunch of commercially backed gatekeepers who like you say have their own priority which is working on what their employer tells them to. This makes sense why would you pay someone to review patches that don't directly benifit your company, but highlights the need to balance projects better with both community and commercial maintainers.
      That's one way of looking at it, sure. But it's also true that projects can't just meander along in every direction, accepting every patch that comes their way. People are already complaining that Wayland is slow to progress - do you think they'd be moving quicker if they were less selective - if they wasted their time merging in stuff that's in the "nice to have" category, but somewhat disruptive to the ongoing work on the "must have" stuff?

      You're seeing it as a commercial thing, but it's just basic project management. You can't do everything at once, even if people are willing to help.

      Comment


      • #33
        Do you see what just happened on #wayland? Wayland dev's just are destroying the project from inside.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
          That's one way of looking at it, sure. But it's also true that projects can't just meander along in every direction, accepting every patch that comes their way. People are already complaining that Wayland is slow to progress - do you think they'd be moving quicker if they were less selective - if they wasted their time merging in stuff that's in the "nice to have" category, but somewhat disruptive to the ongoing work on the "must have" stuff?

          You're seeing it as a commercial thing, but it's just basic project management. You can't do everything at once, even if people are willing to help.
          This is going to be my last post on the matter because you continue to miss my point. You can get things done faster if you have more contributors, its much quicker to review a patch than it is to write and debug everything yourself. Turning away people willing to contribute who could be upskilled enough to become maintainers themselves is just madness. You talk about basic project management then say you cant do everything a once. My point is that some opensource maintainers are trying to do just that, they are trying to take the full load on themselves rather than spreading the load. Basic project management is delegation of tasks and not trying to do everything yourself, the sign of a bad manager is someone who tries to do all the work of the team on there own and does not properly utilise the available resources.

          What I'm seeing as a commercial thing is that the "must have" stuff is decided by the maintainers and their commercial backers so the "must have" for them might be very different from what's must have for you and me. A perfect example is a Glib patch that I wrote so that the GTK filechooser would finally respect .hidden files this also removed the need for separate code in Nautilus to handle the files (or any other GTK based filemanager for that matter). The patch sat there for a while and I received feedback from the devs but it wasn't until another commercially backed dev was trying to implement the same feature in a more hacky way that the maintainers said hang on we have this patch here and BAM it was committed.

          Maybe I'm just a cynical idealist by I really believe FOSS projects could benefit greatly by fostering would be contributors better, while having more community only maintainers to help focus on contributions that are not on the radar of the commercial maintainers.

          Edit: To directly answer your question yes I think it is a great investment to looking at the patches of would be contributors even if they are just nice to haves. Boosting a projects manpower by sacrificing a small amount of short term time will pay off greatly in the long term as I've said continually its about project management and managing all available resources effectively not just turning people away because you think you can do it faster/better on your own.
          Last edited by timothyja; 03-25-2013, 08:08 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by timothyja View Post
            Maybe I'm just a cynical idealist by I really believe FOSS projects could benefit greatly by fostering would be contributors better, while having more community only maintainers to help focus on contributions that are not on the radar of the commercial maintainers.
            I mean I would be glad if somebody would help me with my small projekts, but as example I programmed a curses based youtube-playlist-generator-mplayer-wrapper ^^ and somebody would send me patches to make it a grafical thing that is very mouse-focused, I would not patch my programm too. maybe I would add a additional script, but only if it would not change my api to the functions. If I then would change the api of my functional code I am not shure that I would want to make additional changes for the other tool. So in fact it would be better to make a fork of my thing. and if possible we would work together on a lib-backend-stuff and use it for our both things.

            I even think myself if I will change the interface another time, have some prototypes and even with that I think of forking my own project. because its just simpler if you want to release it, to not have 20 clients updated to new apis and have tests in a folder for 20 clients and its also more decoupled if you have a seperate lib-do-backend-stuff.

            So I totaly understand when a developer dont want additional work for something he dont want to have.

            The bigger, and the more complex a tool is, it gets more difficult to make often releases. More Code = more (potential) for bugs. If you dont want to break something you have to make bigger patches the more code you have.
            Last edited by blackiwid; 03-25-2013, 08:12 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
              I mean I would be glad if somebody would help me with my small projekts, but as example I programmed a curses based youtube-playlist-generator-mplayer-wrapper ^^ and somebody would send me patches to make it a grafical thing that is very mouse-focused, I would not patch my programm too. maybe I would add a additional script, but only if it would not change my api to the functions. If I then would change the api of my functional code I am not shure that I would want to make additional changes for the other tool. So in fact it would be better to make a fork of my thing. and if possible we would work together on a lib-backend-stuff and use it for our both things.

              I even think myself if I will change the interface another time, have some prototypes and even with that I think of forking my own project. because its just simpler if you want to release it, to not have 20 clients updated to new apis and have tests in a folder for 20 clients and its also more decoupled if you have a seperate lib-do-backend-stuff.

              So I totaly understand when a developer dont want additional work for something he dont want to have.

              The bigger, and the more complex a tool is, it gets more difficult to make often releases. More Code = more (potential) for bugs. If you dont want to break something you have to make bigger patches the more code you have.
              I never said a project should just accept any changes. My point is you should encorage people who are interested in your project, tell them clearly if somethings not acceptable such as api changes. Most importantly put a proirty on giving feedback and integating the patches that are a good idea and improve the project.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                The bigger, and the more complex a tool is, it gets more difficult to make often releases. More Code = more (potential) for bugs. If you dont want to break something you have to make bigger patches the more code you have.
                This is a separate issue. Patches can often mean less code, as lines are removed and replaces with better code. If you need to make bigger patches to work around your code it sounds like poorly designed code to me. There are plenty of methodologys and design patterns to avoid this type of thing happening. Not to meantion unit tests, etc

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by timothyja View Post
                  This is a separate issue. Patches can often mean less code, as lines are removed and replaces with better code. If you need to make bigger patches to work around your code it sounds like poorly designed code to me. There are plenty of methodologys and design patterns to avoid this type of thing happening. Not to meantion unit tests, etc
                  yes its maybe poorly designed code, but if you have designed your code perfectly you make no api changes in the future, you only add stuff.

                  So even on the linux kernel, sometimes they replace a part and as example they need to change than all drivers to work with the new abi.

                  if its very simple each retard can do that changes, but still you have to search through the files etc.

                  But the kernel devs also dont integrate all stuff, k their goal is to support as much as possible devices, and if there is somebody who is willing to manage the stuff and the quality of the code is good enough, they integrate it.

                  But they will not integrate wayland into the kernel, if somebody things thats a good idea. its a bit like what this guy wants to do.

                  I mean ok go ahead, fork it, its no big deal. But dont blame the x-server-replacement-guy that he want not integrate a full window-manager.

                  Weston is for him only a toy to demonstrate stuff and to test stuff. its a bit like a unit test. not really but kind of ^^

                  if somebody wants to make a real windows-manager out of weston go ahead fork it... but why does he also fork wayland now, I dont really get it.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                    if somebody wants to make a real windows-manager out of weston go ahead fork it... but why does he also fork wayland now, I dont really get it.
                    He explains in his post to the list: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archive...ch/008131.html

                    "The key point to understand is, that this is not a new protocol in its
                    own right. It *is* the wayland protocol, with a few minor additions
                    that make it possible to do new interesting things."

                    and

                    "Again, to make it clear, Northfield only adds some very basic and
                    necessary protocol that does not exist in Wayland, such as minimize.
                    It is the same in every other way except the new name."

                    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                    But the kernel devs also dont integrate all stuff
                    Again I was never said they should integrate every patch, but should give feedback to willing contributors. Which is talked about in his post also.

                    "I am making it my own personal goal to acknowledge patches within 24
                    hours from the time of submission. This acknowledgement will indicate
                    a clear 'yes' or 'no' as to whether or not the patch(es) are desired
                    for inclusion to the relevant repositories. In either case, I will try
                    to include a clear reason for 'no' or possible additional comments for
                    'yes'."

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Siekacz View Post
                      Do you see what just happened on #wayland? Wayland dev's just are destroying the project from inside.
                      Uh? You know not all of us spend our time monitoring #wayland, reading the wayland's mailing list is time consuming enough :-)
                      The emails doesn't show that "Wayland dev's are destroying the project from inside", there are some disagreements of course but that's 'normal'.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by timothyja View Post
                        Again I was never said they should integrate every patch, but should give feedback to willing contributors. Which is talked about in his post also.
                        The background to this is that he was deeply personally abusive to most people he ever interacted with, calling us fucking idiots, assholes, telling us he didn't care about us or have time for our shit, etc. This included during the review process, angrily brushing away any constructive review comments (e.g. Jason Ekstrand and Pekka on the last round of the minimisation patches) as people with agendas attacking him, or trolling. So no-one ever wanted to review his patches, because even if you did feel like helping out someone who constantly abused you, he'd ignore your entire review and call you a troll - a total waste of everyone's time. Then he'd get really upset when his patches weren't merged, despite having either zero review, or unanswered (aside from abuse) review comments that suggested deep problems with the protocol.

                        The only feedback he wanted was his code merged unquestioningly. Now he's got his own project where he can do that, and Wayland doesn't have someone to scare off potential contributors by abusing them for no reason, and has about the same amount of reviewed code ready for merge. I think it's a win-win.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by daniels View Post
                          The background to this is that he was deeply personally abusive to most people he ever interacted with, calling us fucking idiots, assholes, telling us he didn't care about us or have time for our shit, etc. This included during the review process, angrily brushing away any constructive review comments (e.g. Jason Ekstrand and Pekka on the last round of the minimisation patches) as people with agendas attacking him, or trolling. So no-one ever wanted to review his patches, because even if you did feel like helping out someone who constantly abused you, he'd ignore your entire review and call you a troll - a total waste of everyone's time. Then he'd get really upset when his patches weren't merged, despite having either zero review, or unanswered (aside from abuse) review comments that suggested deep problems with the protocol.

                          The only feedback he wanted was his code merged unquestioningly. Now he's got his own project where he can do that, and Wayland doesn't have someone to scare off potential contributors by abusing them for no reason, and has about the same amount of reviewed code ready for merge. I think it's a win-win.
                          Hmm, ok fair enough then.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            lolololol


                            this guy got banned and got all butt hurt and then went to the mailing list to bitch and they told him to gtfo of the mailing list as well.



                            wayland devs are cut from the same retarded cloth as gnome devs


                            gnome 3.10 or 3.12 + wayland = full retard mode activated


                            y'all motherfuckers better start investing on some chromebooks coz linux desktop is going to the dooooooooooooooggggggggsssssssssss


                            wooooooooooooooooooooofffffffffffffffffffffffff

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by timothyja View Post
                              I never said a project should just accept any changes. My point is you should encorage people who are interested in your project, tell them clearly if somethings not acceptable such as api changes. Most importantly put a proirty on giving feedback and integating the patches that are a good idea and improve the project.
                              Put a priority? Something like this:
                              With this we don't really have any major gaps or issues left with the
                              1.0 releases. We may backport new features if the need arises or make
                              another release if we find a serious problem, but for now I don't have
                              any more 1.0.x releases scheduled.

                              The next major release will be 1.2 (since we're using 1.1 as the
                              unstable master version) and it's time to start planning for that.
                              Some of the things I'd like to get in shape for 1.2 are:

                              - Jans IM + OSK work

                              - XWM split out as a client

                              - Remote rendering functionality

                              - Subsurface / surface group

                              But we can jump into that next year... on that note: I'll be on
                              vacation for the next two weeks. I might check in on IRC or the
                              mailing list, but don't expect me to any real work, like reviewing or
                              merging patches.

                              Happy holidays,
                              Kristian
                              This came from mailing list, 14 Dec 2012.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by daniels View Post
                                The background to this is that he was deeply personally abusive to most people he ever interacted with, calling us fucking idiots, assholes, telling us he didn't care about us or have time for our shit, etc. This included during the review process, angrily brushing away any constructive review comments (e.g. Jason Ekstrand and Pekka on the last round of the minimisation patches) as people with agendas attacking him, or trolling. So no-one ever wanted to review his patches, because even if you did feel like helping out someone who constantly abused you, he'd ignore your entire review and call you a troll - a total waste of everyone's time. Then he'd get really upset when his patches weren't merged, despite having either zero review, or unanswered (aside from abuse) review comments that suggested deep problems with the protocol.

                                The only feedback he wanted was his code merged unquestioningly. Now he's got his own project where he can do that, and Wayland doesn't have someone to scare off potential contributors by abusing them for no reason, and has about the same amount of reviewed code ready for merge. I think it's a win-win.
                                I would like to say, that these statements are very warped and do not represent the reality of the situation. I never called any of the wayland developers 'fucking idiots', 'assholes' or anything of the sort. I cannot say that I have never been upset or frustrated but Daniel Stone is making outrageous claims here that are not true. He says that I demand and expect all of my work is committed directly without review. This is not true at all. On the contrary, I've been harassed by Daniel Stone in private on IRC. He has often tried to tell me that he will not review my patches, saying he never will again, which is a frivolous comment because he does not do a significant amount of reviews in the first place. I expect my patches and others', to be reviewed in a timely fashion and scrutinized to find any bugs. Subsequently, I expect to discuss the issues and correct the patch to make the code better while strengthening my development skills.

                                I am not self righteous, I do not have a big ego and I am quick to admit when I'm wrong. I cannot say I have not said harsh things because I have. I often times 'say the wrong thing' after becoming frustrated with the situation at hand, IRL or IRC. One of my big pet peeves are small patches that are neglected and patches that cause regressions. The product of diligent work in the form of patches are left on the mailing list neglected, not only mine but many others. I have noticed that community submitted patches are often neglected for long periods of time. Conversely, patches from involved company employee's are more often reviewed and accepted instantaneously. It pangs me to see this because the community is full of individuals with their own thoughts, ideas and views. Some individuals are skilled at communicating effectively in english. Some are skilled in other languages to communicate. Others are not particularly skilled in communication but have other strong points. The important part is to realize this and not discard ideas because they're coming from unexpected sources but instead embrace these benefits and channel the energy correctly. I expect people who have accredited degrees and work for top companies to set an example and lead the entire FOSS world, not excluding anyone.

                                It is a known fact that I have trouble communicating my ideas effectively using spoken/written languages. I have found that it is easier for me to communicate using explicit programming languages that allow me to paint a picture ($refresh times per second) and convey millions of words to others, without using more traditional textual representations. Yes, it is true that in order to survive in the 'real world', you must possess a certain level of communication skills. Sadly, I find that it is exceedingly difficult to communicate effectively with others in a situation where the arguments are clearly one sided I have no control that would otherwise give me a real voice.

                                I tried my best to adhere to Kristian's requests over the past year, through out this whole recent ordeal and even now I am still trying to resolve this matter. I have explained that I have nothing but respect for Kristian's works over the years and I am still willing to work with him/them. I would like wayland developers see Northfield as a representation of the powerful community resources that they have shunned. So far as Daniel Stone's comments here, I am appalled. There is absolutely no reason for this 'mud slinging'. This behavior is not unlike that of politicians, a collective group of people that are the #1 problem in the world in which we live today. Daniel's works for Collabora and I'm not sure that they would find his actions here particularly thrilling. I know that I for one, am not impressed.

                                I can't go back and undo what has been said or done. However, I can try to correct the problem by communicating very clearly and concisely through code and visual representations I would like to present. I started on Linux when compiz hit and I felt absolutely invigorated to have the privilege of participating in such an impactive world-wide project. Sadly, compiz is dead for me. I cannot lead the compiz project because I am not extremely familiar with the intricacies of X protocol. In a way, I'm somewhat glad I never really took the time to learn X much. Now I've learned wayland protocol fairly well and it is a pleasure to work on compared to an X window manager. Even through wayland, X is back again through xwayland. Inside of weston, there is an X window manager for xwayland. Through trying to improve this 'xwm' code, I've began to learn and understand a bit more about the X protocol. In my humble opinion, it sucks.

                                I would like everyone to understand that even though this 'fork' touches on many areas strongly, this isn't about wayland or compiz or northfield or X. This isn't about the core wayland developers, this isn't about me, this isn't about people not willing to communicate reasonably. This isn't about a compositing manager or even Linux. This movement is about the collective will of good people who have motives that are other than money. This is about people that do things because they enjoy doing them as a contribution to the rest of the global community. This is about giving people something to hold onto as a representation of true FOSS freedom. This is about us collectively as a group.

                                Unless someone takes a stand and establishes a place where people can have an outlet to work on something great, we're just going to keep going around in circles. The specifics of coding and the actual result are relatively minor details. I want to create a place of special interest where people can exercise their free will, their ideas, their minds. I'm not sure why this movement is such an object of hatred by the group of people that are supposed to be representing these very ideas in the first place. It is nice however, that the wayland/weston code is available freely. This project stands on the shoulders of giants. Not only wayland and Linux and the driver infrastructure that has been carefully mapped out for it over the years, but all of the people that have helped create and drive new innovative technologies. Money does not make the world go 'round. Bright, intelligent, smart, aspiring people make the world go 'round.

                                I will say briefly that Northfield *is* Wayland. I did not want to rename the project at all, I wanted to work under the umbrella of the rest of the wayland developers. I was able to do this for a solid year while learning many of the wayland/weston internals. However over time, I began to see the reasons for the slow moving development and it frustrated me because I know that I cannot fix this problem. I am a professional problem solver. I enjoy solving problems. However, I will not stand for a problem that I cannot solve. It is a personal pleasure to solve problems and sometimes even an obsession. The way I plan to solve the particular problem of community neglect, is by producing a project that will hopefully apply and keep pressure on the wayland, Mir and gnome-shell projects which are all display servers (or plan to be eventually) in their own right.

                                I hate drama. I think phoronix is the very essence of drama. I have not had a phoronix account until today. I can leave the wayland project and work on my goals elsewhere but I cannot go without voice. The wayland channel/mailing list operators have taken my voice away from their project communication mediums through their ban, however I am not going to sit and say nothing while I am being chastised openly. It is unfortunate that they are costing me the extra time and money to establish my own project and server/site. The only thing I know is, since this project is held in such wide opposition, that can only mean that it is in fact the correct thing to do. This is not a fork, we're not changing the binary name, we're not changing any of the wl/wayland/weston names in the code. This project *is* wayland/weston, with a few extra fun stuff. I have every intention of encouraging people submitting patches to the northfield project, to also send them upstream to the wayland mailing list. I also have every intention of developing the code in a way that is compatible with wayland and weston. It is more difficult to do this when I do not have access to the public communication mediums that are useful for monitoring commits.

                                Ubuntu was a great selling point for me because of its definition 'humanity to others'. I do not blame Canonical for doing what they have to do, in order to see their company survive. However, through this, I think that they have also lost site of the very definition of the word “ubuntu”. This is unfortunate but developing a one-distro-only solution is not likely to benefit everyone but instead cause more confusion to users. Northfield has and probably will continue to cause minor disruptions in the existing wayland community. I would have rather done this quietly under the wayland/weston names but this is not what Kristian wanted to see. He voiced this to me, I picked new names and apparently that was a problem too because I was banned shortly thereafter.

                                I would like to now take this time to thank Michael Larabel for hosting and maintaining this site. I do not usually read phoronix but today, it has served the purpose of providing me a voice. So thanks Mike, I appreciate your continued work. I would also like to thank the massive community response I've received so far and continue to receive in the form of code contributions, website contributions and monetary donations. If you would like to contribute code or ideas, please visit #northfield on irc.freenode.net. If you would like to donate, you can use my email address paypal.

                                We are working on a website that is already up but not disclosed at this time. It will take some time to get things set up due to the additional work I have to do, due to the requested split. Now that it has come to this point, I will be spending time moving forward instead of sitting still as is the current feature state of weston. I also do sincerely hope that after this is 'over' (read 'we have a wayland compositor fit for everyday basic use'), gnome-shell and Mir do finally turn out to be great and useful for all, including myself. I do not want separation or disruptions but if this is what it's going to take to make what I want to see happen, so be it.


                                Thank You,

                                Scott Moreau

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X