It seems like although there’s some discussion on the RubyForge list
about IronRuby progress, challenges, things to work on, and the rest,
there’s not as much discussion as a project might like, and practically
none from the Microsoft-based principals. That seems to hinder progress
and make it look like things are moving a bit slowly.
So this email is mostly for John, but I’d like to hear others weigh
in…
Are there development discussions happening on private lists, say inside
Microsoft within the IronRuby or DLR team? If so, you should really
think about moving as much of those discussions as possible into the
open. They will help show that progress is being made, allow community
members to see the process and design moving forward, and most
importantly help the community feel like they’re really a part of the
project.
I know there’s always thoughts about secrecy and springing the next big
software surprise on the world when working at Microsoft, but secrecy is
poison to an OSS community. If you want to get people excited about
helping out and getting involved, you can’t keep them in the dark about
portions of the development process.
I think there’s also a lot to be gained from sharing compiler/runtime
design discussions with a broader audience; there’s a lot of strategy we
could share across implementations, to the benefit of all in the Ruby
world.
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:39:36 -0600, Charles Oliver N. [email protected] wrote:
So this email is mostly for John, but I’d like to hear others weigh in…
Do you have specific evidence that “private” conversations regarding
IronRuby development are taking place and that these private
conversations
are holding the community back from progress? Sorry Charlie (pun wasn’t
intended), but it’s difficult to weigh in on something if that something
is pure speculation based on list volume. Also, have you ever or will
you
ever have a private conversation regarding jRuby with someone @ Sun?
From the outside looking in, I have to be honest: You seem to be
trolling. Are you?
From the outside looking in, I have to be honest: You seem to be
trolling. Are you?
This is Microsoft’s first open source project, as a developer
interested in contributing to IronRuby I am a little hesitant of this
as I see a risk that the development will not be community based and
therefore would be a bad investment of my time… I think Charles is
commenting on this point. If there are internal MS emails about the
design, development, project direction … of IronRuby then it will
fail as a community based project.
This is not really true, depending on what you mean; I think it’s been
over
two years since WiX was made open source.
I have to agree that the original poster’s inclusion of the text
I know there’s always thoughts about secrecy and springing the next big
software surprise on the world when working at Microsoft, but secrecy is
poison to an OSS community.
does not speak well for his intentions. But if you remove this one
sentence, his concerns seem pretty reasonable.
I think some of what we’re seeing is a result of IronRuby’s dependence
on
the DLR – which appears to be far from finalized, and which is not
going to
be driven by the community at all.
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:17:17 -0600, Nicolai Moles-Benfell [email protected] wrote:
This is Microsoft’s first open source project, as a developer
interested in contributing to IronRuby I am a little hesitant of this
as I see a risk that the development will not be community based and
therefore would be a bad investment of my time…
You’re waxing philosophical. From my own view point, as a community
member and contributor I want to gain the benefits obtained froma kick
a$$ implementation of the Ruby language that takes full advantage of all
the .NET platform has to offer. The fact that MSFT might want to have
strategic planning meetings regarding their focus moving forward is
their
business.
From your viewpoint it seems you want something different. A
community-based group hug, or something. Fair enough. We’re looking
for
two different things. But I do believe it’s completely fair and
reasonable for MSFT to expect the ability to hold private strategy and
code planning meetings.
Here’s the thing: If you don’t trust MSFT, don’t contribute any code.
Personally I do trust MSFT. At least enough to be willing to contribute
code w/o the need of being a part of every conversation that takes place
regarding the past, present, and/or future of this project.
Charlie asked for others to weigh in. I did. Maybe I stand alone in my
viewpoint, but this is how I see things.
ever have a private conversation regarding jRuby with someone @ Sun?
Well I would presume that if the project is moving rapidly forward,
completing compiler milestones and improving runtime compatibility, that
discussions are happening somewhere…and though there have been some
discussion about specific libraries or needs in the core classes, there
doesn’t appear to be any discussion about the runtime and compiler
subsystems.
Honestly I just would like to see that you all making contributions to
IronRuby from the outside are getting a chance to discuss and
participate in the runtime implementation. And I imagine that it’s a
very difficult balancing act John has on this project; knowing how
devoted he’s been to open source in the past, I’d like to see him able
to keep the runtime dev process as open as possible. Are you saying you
don’t think that’s a good idea?
From the outside looking in, I have to be honest: You seem to be
trolling. Are you?
No. The danger of having an open project and an open community is that
many people can put forth opinions. Occasionally you will not agree with
them, but it does not mean they are trolling. I’m merely offering a
recommendation to the project leads. Take it or leave it, but don’t
acuse me of being a troll.
Agreed. In fact it was that exact phrase that caused me to look at the
entire message with shades of doubt. Maybe his intentions were legit.
But with that paragraph in place I have my doubts.
I don’t fault Microsoft in any way for wanting to have some surprises;
that specifically is not any reason for concern. Hell, I have a few
surprises I like to/plan to spring and we’re a completely open project.
But the tendency to keep things behind closed doors is antithetical to
the goals of an open project and community. And closed, private
conversations are poison to a community that wants to feel included
and appreciated.
If that’s not happening, that’s great, honestly. I just want to bring it
up as a possible concern. I wouldn’t be on this list if I weren’t
interested in seeing how the IronRuby dev/design process is going.
Here’s the thing: If you don’t trust MSFT, don’t contribute any code.
Personally I do trust MSFT. At least enough to be willing to contribute
code w/o the need of being a part of every conversation that takes place
regarding the past, present, and/or future of this project.
It’s not about trust; it’s about open source as a two-way street. If
you’re going to pour your time into making the public half of IronRuby
better, perhaps you deserve to know about or have some say in the
direction of the other half as well. I don’t have any distrust of John’s
team or intentions; I just would love to see them able to have public
rather than private discussions, and I think both the IronRuby and other
Ruby communities would benefit from it.
I didn’t. I suggested that this is what it seemed like and asked you if
you were. Accussing you of being a troll would sound something like,
Charlie, you’re being a troll.
I don’t think it’s worth going this way.
Obviously it will take time for the Microsoft folks to go from a
completely closed way of working, to an open-source project like those
we’re used to.
But, as Charles Oliver, I’m impatient to see this moving forward.
Today, this list rather feel like a forum for people asking questions
about IronRuby, and sometimes, a Microsoft engineer answers.
I’m a little frustrated as well by this situation, and I’d like to see
more technical discussions between MS engineers on this list. I also
do agree it will probably take some time, we had the exact same issue
at db4o. To be honest, I was even about to raise the same concern. So
I’m glad the question came out.
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:32:27 -0600, Curt H. [email protected] wrote:
I know there’s always thoughts about secrecy and springing the next big
software surprise on the world when working at Microsoft, but secrecy is
poison to an OSS community.
does not speak well for his intentions. But if you remove this one
sentence, his concerns seem pretty reasonable.
Agreed. In fact it was that exact phrase that caused me to look at the
entire message with shades of doubt. Maybe his intentions were legit.
But with that paragraph in place I have my doubts.
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:55:35 -0600, Charles Oliver N. [email protected] wrote:
I don’t have any distrust of John’s
team or intentions; I just would love to see them able to have public
rather than private discussions, and I think both the IronRuby and other
Ruby communities would benefit from it.
Charlie, I can’t help but agree with your overall point. But what you
are
suggesting is that there could be a problem without any real evidence
beyond suggesting the list volume is low. Quite frankly while the list
volume might be less than jRuby, it’s certainly not a ghost town by any
stretch of the imagination. So I’m failing to see your point; not from
a
philisophical level, but from a very specific “where’s the evidence?”
Fair enough, if your entire point is to simply open up the pipes a bit
more, then cool. But that’s not the way it came across.
much additional time do they have?
I heard five developers, but perhaps that was a couple testers/QA as
well.
I assume they email each other during this process; make those emails on
the public list, and suddenly everyone’s a part of it. Granted, they
also have face-to-face communication, so perhaps there aren’t as many
email discussions. But I’d love to see more MS chatter on this list, and
I think others feel the same way. OSS isn’t something you throw over the
wall and say “here, fix this, I’ll get back to you.” Community takes
communication.
If the end result is that greater interaction takes place, then fair
enough: Charlie, you’re not being a troll.
But there is something I think seems to be overlooked: As far as I know,
the IronRuby team is composed of three developers, and (potentially) one
additional developer on loan. Their trying to ship a 1.0 product. How
much additional time do they have?
Fast forward to a post 1.0 release: I believe it would be fair to expect
a
much more interactive community similar to that which has formed over in
IronPython. They’re now two major releases past their 1.0 release, so
it
makes sense that they would be able to be more involved.
But there is something I think seems to be overlooked: As far as I know,
the IronRuby team is composed of three developers, and (potentially) one
additional developer on loan. Their trying to ship a 1.0 product. How
much additional time do they have?
It’s all about perception. IronRuby has been announced as an
open-source project, and as we speak, the development process is
pretty much hidden to me.
I perfectly understand the need of shipping a product. But I also
understand the necessity of being open to succeed in creating an
open-source project. Then as I said, I’m perfectly aware it will take
time to achieve, but opening things seem to me the only way to succeed
in making IronRuby a successful open-source project.
So depending on the goals, there’s a balance to find between moving
the development forward, and getting the community involved.
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:17:12 -0600, Charles Oliver N. [email protected] wrote:
I assume they email each other during this process; make those emails on
the public list, and suddenly everyone’s a part of it. Granted, they
also have face-to-face communication, so perhaps there aren’t as many
email discussions. But I’d love to see more MS chatter on this list, and
I think others feel the same way. OSS isn’t something you throw over the
wall and say “here, fix this, I’ll get back to you.” Community takes
communication.
I think we’re pretty lucky to have Charles trolling! And I do agree
that
more info about what’s going on with IronRuby from MS would help us non
MS
people feel involved. Even if it’s just some meeting minutes or notes
once
a week, that would be appreciated.
It is hard to understand exactly how to contribute at the moment without
some digging and asking lots of little annoying questions of John, John,
and
company (who are very gracious and helpful I might add).
It’s really very exciting to see MS take an open approach with IR. As
long
as the legal team doesn’t stab the community in the back with some
intellectual property garbage down the line, then MS and it’s community
clearly benefit from the cooperation…
On Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:19:35 -0600, Jb Evain [email protected] wrote:
So depending on the goals, there’s a balance to find between moving
the development forward, and getting the community involved.
Agreed. I think it will take some time, and my point regarding the
IronPython list is only partially relevant: They don’t currently take
contributions from the community, so it’s really a completely different
process.