[FusionComm] 2 divisions or 2 projects?

[RYX]

Am Dienstag, den 10.07.2007, 14:50 +0200 schrieb Danny Baumann:
> Hi,
> 
> > Yet again I came across a post where one of us said that compiz and
> > compiz fusion are "2 divisions/projects within the same community" ...
> > 
> > So what are we? Are we 2 divisions within one project (and one
> > community) or are we two projects with a (somehow) overlapping
> > community? I think "divisions/projects" is paradox - it is either one or
> > the other ...
> 
> IMO two divisions of one project. We share things (e.g. community) and
> some things are separated (releases, source hosting).
That's what I think, too. And that's what I thought we all try to work
for. I just wonder why I always read that we are "two
projects/divisions".

And it's not that I only talk about this because I want to raise
discussions, I think such a definition is a very essential part of a
project and if we get that wrong then we don't really work together -
maybe without even noticing it.

> > It is so incredibly annoying that we can't have just ONE definition of
> > what we are instead of everyone having his very own idea of it ... Can't
> > you see that this creates exactly the confusion people tried to warn
> > about?
> 
> What's your preferred definition? As long as we don't identify ourselves
> as 'one project' (something David isn't too fond of), there always will
> be confusion.
I don't know who said that David isn't willing to see us as two
divisions of one project. He always wanted that from what I remember. He
just didn't want to give up the name "compiz" and wants to stay the
person in control over the core. Both things are ensured. Unless I hear
anything different from David himself I don't see any reason to not see
us as one project.

We have no DE-like features in any way and the possibility of having
such features somewhen in x years shouldn't be used as another reason to
split us in two projects (i.e. "compiz" and "fusion") - at least that's
what I think.

> > Someone even created a "fusion-icon" - whatever that may be ... I assume
> > it is some notification-icon for launching compiz (which is btw a big
> > no-go from the standard's perspective, maybe someone on oc.o should
> > start caring for what the users do ...).
> 
> Maybe you should give everyone the freedom to work on whatever he wants
> and to call it however he likes. Just because something is hosted on
> oc.o, it's not necessarily the case the everyone also hosting stuff
> there is also involved.
Sure - everyone is free to do as he likes. But aren't we working towards
one goal and direction? If we are, then we should coordinate things to
fit into the project's goals and identity.

> > Next week there are maybe "fusion"-packages 
> 
> No, when there are eventually packages, they will be called
> "compiz-fusion-plugins-*" and so on. You get the idea.
I hope they will, I only tried to create an image of what may happen if
nobody intervents to correctly inform people about those issues.

> > ... the week after next week
> > they start renaming ccs to cfs (and then to fs) 
> 
> Come on, you wanted to stop posting provoking nonsense. cfs = Compiz
> Fusion System? Does that make sense?
> ccs will stay ccs, because naming it Compiz Configuration System makes
> sense. 
I meant compiz-fusion-settings ... missed the "system" :)

> > ... and so on ... until
> > people say: "look at my fusion desktop, it is so much better than compiz
> > or beryl were" ...
> 
> Then please inform those people so they get the right idea. Those people
> are underinformed (not misinformed! - there's a difference between those
> two) and should be told what's correct. Unfortunately at least I don't
> have enough time to inform each and every user about the relationship
> between Compiz and Compiz Fusion.
That's the point - I have no time to watch and moderate two forums and
inform people about those things AND at the same time care for theming
the new forum and website ... That's why I feel a bit uneasy when I see
that nobody else cares for it, either.

I don't say _you_ should do it, I know you are working hard for the
project. But there are enough people who have nothing really useful to
do and they could (i.e. should) care for those things.

We are responsible for giving the community all needed information to
understand what's going on. Not informing people can also be used as a
form of misinforming and manipulating them.

> > The other side of the medal is that there are many fusion-related
> > bug-reports on compiz.org but nobody of the "fusion-devs" cares about
> > it ... likely because they don't feel responsible for "compiz fusion"
> > things on compiz.org and prefer the oc.o forums for being the place to
> > inform/support users about/with compiz and compiz fusion (if anyone
> > informs the users at all) ... ha ha ha ...
> 
> I think bug reports should be on the bugtracker ... that's what
> bugtrackers are made for. It's way easier for developers who don't have
> much time to track bugs in a bug tracker than in a forum. A forum should
> pre-filter stuff to see what are real bugs and help resolving the
> non-bugs. It's not a matter of lack of care, but it's a matter of time.
> If you look carefully, you'll see that the largest part of the
> developers is not present that much on oc.o either.
> 
> About the forums, we are running in circles. We need vB (done) and
> theming (not done) set up before being able to unify the forums, but
> unfortunately there was no progress on the forums for the last weeks.
> That's the problem we currently have. After unifying the forums, support
> effort and related stuff will obviously also properly channelized.
> I don't have the abilities to do the web & forum stuff, so I (and other
> people who can code and not do web development; or people who are just
> users) rely on people like _you_ at the moment.
I understand that. And I'll do my best to get the themes ready, but they
are made of about a hundred html-files and another hundred images -
which is a quite heavy amount of work. That's why _I_ rely on people
like the support-team to help out on compiz.org from time to time.
Especially now that Mike seems to be on holiday ...

> > We should finally come up with a definition of what we are. If we are
> > two projects then I don't feel that much involved in the fusion part for
> > some reason, if we are two divisions then we should start acting like
> > one project instead of everyone doing what he/she likes.
> 
> For my opinion, see above. I just don't get what you mean by "doing what
> he/she likes" from the actions taken in the last weeks.
The "code-wise" part is working well, but the "community-wise" part is
sometimes a problem and needs some care, too.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Danny
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Community mailing list
> Community at lists.compiz-fusion.org
> http://lists.compiz-fusion.org/mailman/listinfo/community