[IAEP] SoaS as a Sugar Labs project.

[Bert Freudenberg]

On 26.08.2009, at 17:42, David Farning wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Michael Stone<michael at laptop.org>  
> wrote:
>> Tomeu,
>>> Frankly Michael, the only way I can read these posts from you is  
>>> that
>>> you are frustrated because we aren't churning more work,  
>>> regardless of
>>> how much we have achieved that is relevant to OLPC deployments.
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>> I do not accept that work I have managed to do in the past is  
>> sufficient simply
>> because it was the work that I was able to do. Instead, I form or  
>> disintegrate
>> this acceptance with reference to three external measures:
>>
>>   * absolute standards of quality, e.g. as formed by acceptance  
>> testing against
>>     written design goals or user experiences,
>>
>>   * relative standards of quality as evidenced by the respect and  
>> participation
>>     of specific individuals whose judgment I trust and whose biases  
>> seem to me
>>     to control for some of my obvious biases, and
>>
>>   * freeform standards of quality as evidenced by what other people  
>> have
>>     made from the work.
>>
>> I am therefore frustrated, for the reason you mention, because I  
>> believe that
>> our work is achieves none of these standards of "good enough".
>>
>> (Unsurprisingly, I'm frustrated for some other reasons too, but  
>> that's neither
>> here nor there.)
>>
>>> Do you have any actionable ideas about how to work better for our  
>>> users?
>>
>> I perceive a double bind: I have lots of ideas, but ideas are cheap  
>> and seem
>> most unwelcome here -- they're just "talk" instead of "do", aren't  
>> they?
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> P.S - Maybe a reasonable compromise on the double bind would be for  
>> me to share
>> a small number of ideas, or to share as many ideas fit into a fixed  
>> duration
>> conversation in a different medium?
>
> An effective way to become a respected member of on open source
> community is to start with small ideas and implement them.  If the
> deliverable works, is useful, and meets coding standards it will be
> accepted. A couple of iterations through this:
> a: Produce improvements to the product.
> b. Help the contributor earn the respect of the current community so
> they will be encourage to participate  and take on larger projects.
>
> That tends to open doors.
>
> Drive by ventings tend to shut them.
>
> david


I find dismissing Michael's points as "drive by venting" highly  
inappropriate.

- Bert -