Re: [pygame] The great pySchism, was: how to remove spam comments in pygame wiki

[Devon Scott-Tunkin <djvonfunkin@xxxxxxxxx>]

ditto everything Brian just said.

Devon

--- On Fri, 7/31/09, Brian Fisher <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Brian Fisher <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [pygame] The great pySchism, was: how to remove spam comments in  pygame wiki
> To: pygame-users@xxxxxxxx
> Date: Friday, July 31, 2009, 10:24 PM
> On Fri, Jul
> 31, 2009 at 6:53 PM, Nirav Patel <olpc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
> It seems this is going in a direction detrimental to
> everyone's cause,
> 
> and I do mean everyone.  Please, lets be civilized about
> this and try
> 
> to come up with a middle ground.
> 
> 
> I appreciate that you would like to find
> a situation where people can work together - but did you
> have any middle ground in mind? Cause I don't really see
> any right now.
> 
>  
> First, It is clear that having two pygame websites will do
> nothing but
> 
> confuse the community of users and developers.
> 
> I disagree with this. The other things that having two
> pygame websites would do (besides cause confusion) is show
> in what ways the new site being constructed is or isn't
> going to actually be any better than the current one; and it
> would create competition and comparisons between the two.
> Good ideas implemented well on one side will inspire and
> educate the other. 
> 
> 
> Besides, having two websites for pygame users for a while
> doesn't mean there will be two websites forever. If one
> wins, the other will probably die, one way or another. A
> little confusion in the short term may well be worth it in
> the end.
> 
> 
>   It is also clear that
> 
> the current pygame website has flaws. 
> If by flaws you mean spam comments on the doc pages, I
> agree but that is very easily fixed without doing any
> "new site" development at all. If you mean
> anything besides that, I think to say it has flaws is
> overstating the condition. It very much achieves what it
> went out to achieve. 
> 
> 
> What I would agree is that there are many opportunities
> which could be pursued - I appreciate that Jug and Devon
> want to pursue them, but quite frankly they are speculative
> improvements, the true value of which is unproven. So it
> seems to me that the impass is Jug and Devon said they
> didn't want to work from the existing site or it's
> underlying technology or framework - while Rene doesn't
> want to deal with the cost of switching the site over to
> another system for the mere promise of the improvements they
> want to bring. 
> 
> 
> The only way I see to really resolve this and come up with
> the "middle ground" you want is to let the ideas
> and possible value of the new site that has started
> development become an actual reality.
> 
>  
> 
> Finally, it is clear that
> the
> 
> new website being proposed is not acceptable to replace the
> current
> 
> one.
> 
> 
> I don't think that it is all that
> clear exactly what the website will become.
> 
> What the new website being proposed is, is just a proposal.
> And that proposal is currently to throw out everything on pygame.org and develop using a
> system that the current site developer/maintainers have no
> experience or desire to work with, for a bunch of features
> whose value to the community seems good on paper, but in the
> end is not actually clear.
> 
> 
> If, on the other hand, the website being proposed becomes a
> reality though, and people who use it think it's super
> awesome, and it looks like it will likely be well
> maintained, then the new proposal would be something like
> "migrate the project data over, migrate the site over
> to the main server, and then let everyone love the
> awesomeness", which is a very different proposal.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> I understand that not everyone wants mailing list traffic
> about it,
> 
> but I think the first step would be to not have a seperate
> closed
> 
> mailing list discussing website development.  Discussing
> it here
> 
> allows everyone to debate about features/implementation
> without
> 
> building it first and then getting rejected.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with keeping it on list -
> but I have to ask, are pygame-users
> offended/annoyed/displeased by the mailing list traffic on
> this? I'm not aware of anybody who has said so. Have you
> heard from anyone who is? 
> 
> 
> I can't speak for Zack, but when he posted
> "Let's do our best to keep drama off the mailing
> list" I interpreted it to be more like saying people
> should keep their posts practical and professional instead
> of being emotional - as opposed to saying "take it off
> list guys"
> 
> 
> 
>