Forum OpenACS Q&A: Response to Priorities, Roles, and the future of OpenACS

Posted by Don Baccus on
<blockquote><i>I don't have either the time or the inclination to take full and entire responsibility for an OpenACS 4 subproject. Does that mean I shouldn't be able to
    contribute at all? </i></blockquote>
No, not at all.  In fact, there have been a couple of folks interested in the progress of the OpenACS port who've told me they don't have time to port who've responded positively when I've said, "well, if you could free the time to try a virgin install on Oracle, that would help.  Could you?"  And then when I later came back and say, "OK, we've hit this little milestone, would you mind testing an Oracle install?" they did so.
Likewise there are lots of little documentation and testing tasks that  need to be done.  If you can't take responsibility for a package port  or other significant subtask, that's fine.
If you can't help at all, that's fine, too.
<blockquote><i>Personally I think that it's time for Jerry to start his own, independent project somewhere, someplace, dealing with some issue or some software
    package or another.

    Wow. So if I don't fit your definition of a model OpenACS user, I should leave too? </i></blockquote>
No, that's not what I'm saying at all.  Jerry has a strong personal vision of what he'd like to see this project be: a place where he can pad his resume, where the needs of the community at large are subordinate to the financial success of the subcommunity who is trying to make a living off of the project, etc.
That's not my vision.  Jerry's odds of transforming the OpenACS project into something that fits his personal vision are very low - it will only happen if I leave the project.  On the other hand, if he starts his own project he can build it around whatever vision he wants.
<p>And if he does start his own project I can promise that I won't show up and try to yank "vision control" from his hands and place it into a steering committee elected by his user community.
<p>I'm just not the kind of person that would ever steal control of a project from its founder.
<blockquote><i> Jerry won't make his search project part of OpenACS unless he succeeds in grabbing
    partial control over the organization. In fact, it's rather vicious. </i></blockquote>
Well, Jerry's been fairly vicious as well.
<p>After all, the act of trying to remove Ben and my authority to control the project and to place that authority into an elected steering committee shoved down our throats over our protests is a vicious act directed personally at us.
<p>Ben and I started this project and have poured about a year and a half of our lives into it.  I came back after a 3 1/2 week vacation to  learn that Jerry's trying to yank this project out of our hands.
<p>Have you or any of Jerry's fans thought about just how shitty it feels to have to deal with bullshit attempts to screw up this organization at the most crucial point in its short life thus far?
<p>As Michael implies, if we fail to deliver OpenACS 4.x in a timely fashion there won't be anything here worth fighting over.
<p>So ... *I'm* the bad guy?  For losing my temper at someone who's trying to steal control of the project we started and have worked so hard on? For losing my temper at one who has caused so much distraction that it threatens to derail progress on the single most important thing we have to deliver?  For trying to snuff his petty little revolution once and for all?
<p>Jerry's just an angelic little Lenin, eh?  Bah...