Re: [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: Communication]]

[Alexander Kirillov <kirillov math sunysb edu>]

OK, since I am one of those people who did work rather closely with SUN
team, let me add a couple of words. 

First, I - and most GDP members - really appreciate the work of SUN
team. And I also have very high opinion of Eugene, Pat, and Irene, based
on their work (this has nothing to do with their affiliation with SUN or
other political things). I guess each of you is as much a member of GDP
as John, Eric, me, or anyone else. So do not view this thread as
argument between "us" and "them"; this is an argument among "us" (which
happens in any  project with more than 3 members, I guess...)

Second,  when discussing various specific documentation issues with
Eugene, Pat, and Irene, I never had a feeling of being "pushed" or
"bulldozed". In most cases we easily reached an agreement. And I did
feel that my suggestions and comments were taken into account. 

Third, the style of SUN team is indeed different from what we are used
to, and there is some "take it or leave it" feeling. For example, with 
some  of the docs which had been maintained by me, SUN team decided that
they want to rewrite them completely, rather than send me corrections -
and they didn't ask my permission to do so. But in my case, in almost
all the cases I was only too glad that they stepped forward to do it:
these docs had been in need of rewrite for a long time. And I always
felt that if I didn't like their document, I always  could talk to the
module maintainer or Dan or John and argue for inclusion of my version
rather than SUN's. No, I never actually did it: even if there were some
parts in SUN's document that I felt I did better than them (this is
probably just my vanity, but anyway...), on the whole SUN's
documentation of, say, GNOME terminal was superior to what I had before
(mostly because I lacked time to rewrite it), and I saw it. 

A suggestion for the future: if for some application there are two
versions of docs, original maintainer's and SUN's and the original
author is unhappy about this, he should let John (and app developer)
know, and then it is up to them to make a decision which version to
choose or somehow merge these two docs. I do not think SUN team would
object to this, right? (after all, SUN will have  complete control over
SUN's distribution of GNOME to be packaged with Solaris anyway). 





On Tue, 2002-09-03 at 05:29, Pat Costello wrote:
> Hi John, 
> 
> Thanks for your diplomatic reply to Eric's postings. 
> 
> >From the start of our involvement with the GNOME project, the Sun documentation 
> team knew that we were in a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situation. In 
> other words: 
> 
> If we pursued a high-profile approach, copying the mailing list with each 
> action, question, and suggestion then we might be accused of taking over, 
> bulldozing, or stepping on toes.
> 
> If we pursued a low-profile approach, discussing topics with directly involved 
> individuals, then we might be accused of being very closed, or having a 
> communication problem. 
> 
> Until people got used to the presence of the Sun documentation team, we thought 
> that the best course of action would be the low-profile approach. In the event, 
> we stand accused of the consequences of both courses of action. Somewhat galling 
> considering the efforts we have made to be sensitive to other contributors. 




> 
> Therefore, I conclude that we should switch to the high-profile approach. At 
> least then we can only be accused of the one set of misdemeanors. 
> 
> I disagree with Eric on quite a few points of detail, however I don't think it 
> is worth getting into a "I think this" "you said that" discussion of Eric's 
> specific points. Unless, of course, Eric wants to pursue specific points 
> publicly. In which case I suggests he takes those points individually to the 
> mailing list. 
> 
> Pat
> 
> 
> 
> John Fleck wrote: 
> > 
> > Let me suggest that, to the extent there is a communication problem
> > here, more than a bit of the fault is my own. One of my roles was
> > supposed to be as a liason between the GDP and the Sun Docs team, and I
> > have clearly let both sides down here. Sorry.
> > 
> > Both Pat and Eric have said things with which I agree.
> > 
> > The Sun team's style of communication and that of the GDP are quite
> > different. The GDP's traditional mode of communication invokes the
> > mailing lists and IRC, both very public settings. My experience with you
> > Sun team members has been that you tend to prefer private emails. I have
> > tried to traverse this terrain carefully, respecting your style of
> > communication by responding in private, asking permission if I felt it
> > was necessary to elevate something to a discussion on the public list. I
> > would frankly have preferred if y'all had jumped into the public fray
> > more, on IRC and gnome-doc-list, but I have tried to respect your style
> > of communication and work with it. In this regard, I think Eric's point
> > is well taken - you have not been especially active in this part of our
> > community life, where much of the planning of our big-picture ideas and
> > goals goes on.
> > 
> > That said, however, in those private emails, in the blow-by-blow of
> > working out who's doing what doc, and what their status is, I think the
> > Sun team has been effective in communicating directly with the
> > individuals involved. I can't speak for others here, but that certainly
> > has been the case for gnome-utils, the users guide and the other bits of
> > miscellany that we've been dealing with. The failing here was mine in
> > not finding ways to elevate things to the public fora so others would
> > know what was going on.
> > 
> > I think Eric's contention that the Sun team has run roughshod over
> > individual documenters is unfair. It's tricky terrain to negotiate, but
> > I know of no case where the Sun docs team insisted on having us use
> > their doc over the objection of a doc's original author/maintainer. In
> > this regard, my experience strongly supports Pat's contention that the
> > Sun team has tried hard to do the right thing. (I can't speak to the
> > gedit situation.)
> > 
> > So how do we ensure that we communicate better, so we give users what
> > they deserve, which is the best-documented desktop there is?
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > John
> >