[Members] minutes of XSF Annual Meeting, 2009-10-06
aadaam at gmail.com
Wed Oct 7 15:53:59 CDT 2009
Just my two cents, using this quote from Peter only as a guideline:
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im>wrote:
> For the record, this is not why I have removed myself from the Council.
> Not that I don't get frustrated sometimes, but I recognize that change
> takes a long time. When I compare where XMPP is today to where it was in
> 2004 (when we publishd the RFCs) or 2001 (before we got involved with
> the IETF) or 1999 (when our community was just a bunch of small
> open-source projects), I take hope from the fact that we have come a
> long way. Can we improve? You bet. But overall I think we've done a darn
> good job as a community of navigating from a very small, very informal
> team hanging out in an IRC channel to a large community whose technology
> is being used worldwide by the likes of Apple, Google, and Nokia.
> > I know I will be flamed for this mail, but I feel someone has to get his
'Till 2004, there was a long way, for sure. I joined the active discussions
somewhere around 2006 (however, fooling around with jabber sometime at the
beginning of the decade)
Since 2006, I don't feel that much advance.
As some of you know, I've joined XMPP and XSF to help people communicate. I
joined to help a chat protocol. As an enterprise engineer, I've always felt
XMPP shouldn't be used as Message-Oriented-Middleware, I'm sorry: I've seen
a lot much more suitable protocols. Also I felt jingle as some kind of
dead-end, given the practical zero number of implementations until very
recently (psi and pidgin in the last few months, also the GTalk video
plugin, maybe at the end of last year), which was in some parts due to
people not favoring voice (that's why it wasn't important even for google).
Please don't flame on it that my claims do make sense or not: it's not the
Also, I've always felt that such democracy which Peter wants to have has a
lot of communication overhead: too much mails (I know most of you won't read
this one, for example), too much chat, too much ideas.. hard to control. You
know, human societies tend to have hierarchies for a reason. Even if you
don't make a hierarchy, an informal one will show up: that's what Mickael
could have called the XMPP core. I'm sure some people's voice do more than
mine, for example, and this is natural.
I also felt this kind of not-to-decide-too-much, allow-everything-possible,
these things just killed the speed as more and more and more people joined
in. We slowed down because priorities weren't clear, because it wasn't clear
which voice has what effect. It's hard, but large organizations are slower
then small ones. Google is slow now, it was quick just a few years ago. And
And also, this kind of steadiness is the basis of this thread. Have a
decisive board with 3 members temporarily? Sorry, this is the so called
bikeshedding for me; it's not the matter we should talk about. I came here
to talk about how people talk to each other, and how we could improve this
experience, make it more life-like, not to talk about how to solve a
situation which would exists for two weeks anyway.
As Mickael said, this is a good symptom for what happens inside...
I do not want to hurt anybody, I'm sorry: I have my professional opinion,
and I had some studies from social sciences, that's all. And I understand
and respect the clear democratic way of how Peter thinks, because is such
clean, I'm just not sure it's always the best solution - but people do say
it to my rude honesty also :)
Aadaam <aadaam at gmail.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Members