On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:08 AM, R. David Murray <rdmurray@bitdance.com> wrote:
On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 14:26:15 +0100, <lukasz@langa.pl> wrote:
All in all, is anyone of the opinion that losing him as a community member is worse than keeping him around?
If losing him was the only consequence this would be pretty much a no-brainer. However, it is likely the consequences of a general ban would be more widespread than that (negative publicity, etc).
Right, it isn't banning Anatoly in particular that's likely to be controversial, it's making it completely clear that "yes, if you successfully piss off all the people that hold the keys to the python.org infrastructure, you can and will be banned from participating in any of the communication forums provided by that infrastructure, specifically the mailing lists, the issue tracker and the wiki (and the source code repo, if you previously had commit privileges)".
The mail archives will show that Brett's not the only one that has tried to channel Anatoly's energy more productively (and the creation of python-ideas did keep him from bothering python-dev too much for quite a long time), but every time we think there are signs of progress, some other new issue comes up and the pattern is always basically the same:
- "X sucks"
- "Yes, it's a hard problem, and not very exciting, so volunteers aren't inclined to work on it"
- "but X sucks, so we should do Y"
- "but Y is hugely inconvenient for everyone, so it will never happen. Besides, even if it did happen, it won't help fix X"
- "we should totally do Y, you're all idiots for not seeing that"
- ...
Although substitute alternate explanations at step 2 like "it's a rare problem" or "it's not a problem for the core team to deal with", or "it's not a significant problem for anyone else" or "yes, efforts are in process to deal with that, but its a long slow effort to build community consensus" etc, etc.
Regards, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia