<dinosaur unlurking & top posting>
Thank you for the diligent writeup and sharing of this fascinating
deliberation. Every few years I check this group and amazed at how iLugc
has / continues to buck the fate of other LUGs around the world.
This part brought a smile to my face:
*" 1 member's stand is unclear. Member with id dirk.. Not accounting
opinion of RMS, as he isn't member of our group."*
Keep up the good work everyone.
</dinosaur unurking>
-Karra
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 6:01 AM Udaya Kumar <tuxuday@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Narrative as third person.
PREAMBLE
For the month of May 2019 talks, member Uday proposed a talk in which he
wanted to talk about how improper deployment can lead to disaster. He
wanted to share about an incident that happened with Knight Capital in US.
The talk was opposed by member, Shakti Kanan. His opinion was that the talk
doesn't involve any FLOSS tools. Once he aired his opinion, member Mohan -
who also plays the role of organizing ilugc meetings - went back on
accepting Uday's talk. Subsequently various members aired their opinions.
Member Sahas commented thus
"
Just because an incident happened in the proprietary works doesn't mean
that we shouldn't understand or learn from their mistakes.
"
Member with id dirk commented thus, to Uday's talk.
"
Of course, you meant deployment as in devops, here's a better link I just
found:
https://dougseven.com/2014/04/17/knightmare-a-devops-cautionary-tale/
"
Another member Rengarak
"
There is nothing going to wrong in allowing a case study on How a software
engineering
practice should not be. It is going to help FLOSS user to improve their
skills
"
Member Rengarak, gone to the extent of obtaining the view of Richard M
Stallman. Luckily he got response too. RMS opinionated thus.
"
I think that a GNU/Linux user group should stick to points specific
to the GNU/Linux operating system or free/libre software.
If it is about "becoming a batter engineer" and not about
GNU/Linux or free software, it is irrelevant.
"
Mohan, being the organizer of the meetings out-voted as thus.
"
ILUGC promotes FLOSS and related technologies. I'm sorry but I have to say
software engineering and devops best practices without involving any of the
FLOSS technologies cannot be encouraged in this forum.
"
Based on the above, we arrive at what constructs ilugc forum.
RESOLUTION
This is about setting precedent on what can be discussed in Ilugc. There
are two ways one can approaching this.
1. Statements(principles) defined by us/predecessor, which we follow to the
word.
Principles are good, when it involves group of people - especially
educated mind. If there is deviation by any of its member, they can be put
in line by asserting the principles.
Principles are what they are. They are bunch of statements defined by
few individuals - based on their stand "at that time". The key words are
"at the time", as words are prone to interpretation. That is why we have
courts, though we have well defined constitution & laws, we need someone to
interpret them. Interpretation varies between individual, hence common
party "court of law".
Even in our case, the October 2018 talk by Carl Malamud. That had
nothing to do with FLOSS. But one of the member, Shrini, who opposed the
talk by Uday is the one who organized for the talk by Carl Malamud. It's
hard to pin-point what was the thought process of Shrini, when he promoted
Carl Malamud talk, and when he opinionated against talk by Uday. And in
this very case of talk of Uday, the organizer, Mohan, initially accepted
the talk then subsequently opinionated against it. So its understood that
principles are prone to interpretation and even a person's interpretation
of words differ from time to time. Hence principles though are good at
helping in members tow the line, can't be used as the base on which
decisions are made.
2. Opinion of Members
This is nothing new. Democracy. Being a public forum this is the best
option. People air their opinion after digestion of their understanding of
principles and express it in their own words. Opinions go through two more
stages - absorption & presentation. So they are refined.
Cutting the words.
3 members opinionated that the talk should be allowed. Uday, Sahas,
Rengarak.
2 members opinionated that the talk shouldn't be allowed. Shakti, Shrini.
1 member reversed his opinion over the course of discussion. Mohan.
1 member's stand is unclear. Member with id dirk.
Not accounting opinion of RMS, as he isn't member of our group.
So it's 3 yes, 3 no, 1 unclear. Which results in stale-mate. Bane of
democracy, especially with lack of participation.
This is where precedent comes in the picture. How we dealt with such talks
previously?
The October 2018 talk by Carl Malamud. It has nothing to do with FLOSS, yet
we as a group entertained and enjoyed it.
Certain members aired valid opinions.
For the talk
Sahas - Given the facts are in the open, I think it would be a useful talk,
especially for young developers.
Sahas - Just because an incident happened in the proprietary works doesn't
mean that we shouldn't understand or learn from their mistakes.
Rengarak - There is nothing going to wrong in allowing a case study on How
a software engineering practice should not be. It is going to help FLOSS
user to improve their skills.
Uday - I am all for the promotion of GNU/Linux. I also subscribe to the
idea Software principles/process shouldn't be discouraged, as they aren't
tied to any specific technology. Please understand that processes can't be
patented.
Uday - Practices can't be patented as such they are open to all. Moreover
the analysis by SEC is open to all, not restricted by any-means.
Also Quoting Prabhu, who was active in ilugc earlier, in the given
link/thread.
https://www.freelists.org/post/ilugc/change-in-name,30
"
ILUGC should encourage the use of free(dictionary
meaning) software. I don't think commercial software should be
shunned or thrown out. We always enjoy freebies (even if the
software is commercial!). ;) However as always free(dict meaning)
software is given the highest priority and preference. We are open
to discussing technical things about software/hardware. This has how
it has been always and it has nothing to do with the FSF or RMS
directly.
"
Against the talk
Shrini -
This may seem to be very strict. But, What other tech community can be
strong enough to use only GNU/Linux on a talk, other than a GNU/Linux User
Group?
Similarly, what other tech community, other than a GNU/Linux users group,
can be strong enough to talk only about Free/Open Source software?
CONCLUSION
The votes are tied at 3. But there was precedent set by Carl Malamud talk.
Also there was consensus that all technical things should be discussed in
ilugc related to software & hardware, in 2002. Hence it is promulgated that
talks/topics related to best software practices be allowed in ilugc.
--
Cheers,
Uday.
_____________________________________
ILUGC List: http://www.freelists.org/list/ilugc
ILUGC Web: http://ilugc.in/