Grievance

[James Tabor]

Grievance: Cease and Desist Request: Standard Resolution Procedure:

1) The Project Coordinator Should attempt to make decisions according
to the consensus of the Project Members.
Mr. Bragin is making procedural changes with out the full consensus of
all Project Members.

2) The Repository Coordinator Should make decisions which are fair and
reasonable, and preferably consistent with the consensus of the
Project Members.
Due to the unfilled Repository Coordinator position, Mr. Bragin has
assumed full control of that position and making decisions with out
the full consensus of all Project Members.

3)  General rules:
a) Violation of first rule: Project Coordinator issued change orders,
Project Members began working on the changes. These changes are
against the general consensus among the Project Members. Reference:
http://www.reactos.org/archives/public/ros-dev/2008-June/010394.html

b) Violation of second rule: Project Coordinator banned Project Member
with out the ability to rejoin the Project at any time.

c) Violation of third rule: Project Coordinator assumed full control
of Repository Coordinator position and used that position to remove
access to a Project Member.

Adhering to: Standard Resolution Procedure: The procedure: The
procedure begins when a draft General Resolution is announced on a
public Project mailing list. Which no other rule can apply, I hereby
request a Cease and Desist until this Grievance is heard by all
Project Members. Project Members have a contractual agreement and must
abide by it.

PS: This is a very serious mater and not at all a joke. If this
project has any merit, it needs to resolve these issues in the open.

[Aleksey Bragin]

On Jun 24, 2008, at 2:21 AM, James Tabor wrote:

>   1) The Project Coordinator Should attempt to make
> decisions according
>  to the consensus of the Project Members.
>  Mr. Bragin is making procedural changes with out the full consensus of
>  all Project Members. 
When a so-called "audit" problem happened, it was almost the same  
(personal problems between developers, namely Hartmut Birr, Ge van  
Geldorp, Casper Hornstrup and Alex Ionescu, which resulted in mutual  
charges of various bad and made up things, and gladly picked up by  
some people related to Wine team to suppress ReactOS project  
development).

And yes, James, there was a democracy back then, and all decisions  
were made according to the consensus of Project Members.
But do you remember what this led to? And where would it go if Mr.  
Geldorp would not help (even though he wasn't "at my side"!) and Mr.  
Bragin would not back up the repository and open it up for further  
development?

As for Repository Coordinator, why made up positions where there is  
no need? Coordinate what? And yes, I not only assumed, but took full  
control, in order to prevent situations like "audit fiasco" in future.

If you see how much outburst and disclosing private information  
(vulnerable to at least one person!) Magnus Olsen did, it,  
unfortunately!, proofs he's mentally unstable, and can not take part  
in this project. He's welcome to send in patches though, I won't mind  
reviewing them, since legally his work could go into ReactOS repository.

If there are further questions, don't hesitate to continue  
discussion. I want to clear this up once and for good. One thing  
which I ensure you, there will be no committers who work against the  
project and open source.


With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.

[James Tabor]

Hello,

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:05 AM, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey(a)reactos.org> wrote:
>  
>  On Jun 24, 2008, at 2:21 AM, James Tabor wrote:
>
> >   1) The Project Coordinator Should attempt to make
> > decisions according
> >  to the consensus of the Project Members.
> >  Mr. Bragin is making procedural changes with out the full consensus of
> >  all Project Members. 
>  When a so-called "audit" problem happened, it was almost the same
>  (personal problems between developers, namely Hartmut Birr, Ge van
>  Geldorp, Casper Hornstrup and Alex Ionescu, which resulted in mutual
>  charges of various bad and made up things, and gladly picked up by
>  some people related to Wine team to suppress ReactOS project
>  development).
>
>  And yes, James, there was a democracy back then, and all decisions
>  were made according to the consensus of Project Members.
>  But do you remember what this led to? And where would it go if Mr.
>  Geldorp would not help (even though he wasn't "at my side"!) and Mr.
>  Bragin would not back up the repository and open it up for further
>  development?
>
>  As for Repository Coordinator, why made up positions where there is
>  no need? Coordinate what? And yes, I not only assumed, but took full
>  control, in order to prevent situations like "audit fiasco" in future.
>  
Used in the beginning to control us and manipulate the project. I
guess based on you explanation you have assumed full control of this
project and you are asserting your self. The problem now, we do not
need a dictator and the quickest way to run off developers like myself
would do the very thing you are doing now. You must realize I'm not
the only one that thinks this way.

>   If you see how much outburst and disclosing private
> information
>  (vulnerable to at least one person!) Magnus Olsen did, it,
>  unfortunately!, proofs he's mentally unstable, and can not take part
>  in this project. He's welcome to send in patches though, I won't mind
>  reviewing them, since legally his work could go into ReactOS repository.
>
>  If there are further questions, don't hesitate to continue
>  discussion. I want to clear this up once and for good. One thing
>  which I ensure you, there will be no committers who work against the
>  project and open source.
>
>
>  With the best regards,
>  Aleksey Bragin. 

This is very formal and is not in any way threatening. I would
appreciate having your last comment be recanted due to it creates a
hostile environment. We are gentlemen here.


Thank you for your time answering this,
Sincerely,
James Tabor

[Zachary Gorden]

Since I'm stuck at work without IRC, I need to do this the old fashioned way
during my lunch break.  I've followed the general discussion thanks to the
IRC logs of other people, so here goes.

First, Aleksey, you said that the intial blowup occurred because Magnus went
public and etc with what you said was a private issue between him and you.
But you also said that his development/commit pattern was hurting the
project.  If that was the case, then I personally don't think it should have
stayed an issue between just the two of you.  If his changes were that
disruptive, it's a matter that every member of the project needs to help
deal with.  And this should be the case no matter who the person is.
Second, the need for a "repository coordinator" or someone besides yourself
who has the ability to add and remove commit access is not merely an
administrative matter.  The lack of such a person placed more strain on you
in the recent incident because the only person Magnus could go to after his
commit access was limited was you, a person who had become extremely
frustrated with him.  Frustration can go both ways, as both of you became
pissed at the other.  Not the best mood to be in to resolve issues.  While
you, as the project coordinator, are the one who lays down a general
direction for the project, it doesn't mean you need to act as the enforcer.
Having one or two people who overlap in certain areas of responsibility
helps let you avoid becoming too entangled in one particular issue and
becoming too personally invested in it.  In a major disagreement, that is
definitely something to avoid.

The number of developers is still small, so it's not out of the ordinary
that you pay personal attention to things you think are important or
problematic.  That's also not a bad thing, but you could easily become
overextended and overworked.  It also creates an overdependence on you for
certain, mundane matters, which further spread you thin.  You also may
forget or not even be aware that a certain someone else may be able to help
you with a specific issue, simply because that person never found such an
issue falling into his/her (one day) field of responsibility.

There are plenty of people around you who can help you deal with these
matters, just trust us to stay on the path you set.  Even if you feel a
developer isn't complying, that doesn't mean you personally need to go after
them.  The rest of us are here and if we know of the problem and how serious
you think it is, we'd be able to help.

Anyways, that's my say in this entire affair.  Also, the me logged in right
now is my comp at home, for logging purposes, so I won't respond on IRC
until I get home.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:48 AM, James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

>   Hello,
>
>  On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 5:05 AM, Aleksey Bragin <aleksey(a)reactos.org>
>  wrote:
> >  
> >  On Jun 24, 2008, at 2:21 AM, James Tabor wrote:
> >
> > >   1) The Project Coordinator Should attempt to make
> > > decisions according
> > >  to the consensus of the Project Members.
> > >  Mr. Bragin is making procedural changes with out the full consensus of
> > >  all Project Members. 
> >  When a so-called "audit" problem happened, it was almost the same
> >  (personal problems between developers, namely Hartmut Birr, Ge van
> >  Geldorp, Casper Hornstrup and Alex Ionescu, which resulted in mutual
> >  charges of various bad and made up things, and gladly picked up by
> >  some people related to Wine team to suppress ReactOS project
> >  development).
> >
> >  And yes, James, there was a democracy back then, and all decisions
> >  were made according to the consensus of Project Members.
> >  But do you remember what this led to? And where would it go if Mr.
> >  Geldorp would not help (even though he wasn't "at my side"!) and Mr.
> >  Bragin would not back up the repository and open it up for further
> >  development?
> >
> >  As for Repository Coordinator, why made up positions where there is
> >  no need? Coordinate what? And yes, I not only assumed, but took full
> >  control, in order to prevent situations like "audit fiasco" in future.
> >  
>  Used in the beginning to control us and manipulate the project. I
>  guess based on you explanation you have assumed full control of this
>  project and you are asserting your self. The problem now, we do not
>  need a dictator and the quickest way to run off developers like myself
>  would do the very thing you are doing now. You must realize I'm not
>  the only one that thinks this way.
>
> >   If you see how much outburst and disclosing
> > private information
> >  (vulnerable to at least one person!) Magnus Olsen did, it,
> >  unfortunately!, proofs he's mentally unstable, and can not take part
> >  in this project. He's welcome to send in patches though, I won't mind
> >  reviewing them, since legally his work could go into ReactOS repository.
> >
> >  If there are further questions, don't hesitate to continue
> >  discussion. I want to clear this up once and for good. One thing
> >  which I ensure you, there will be no committers who work against the
> >  project and open source.
> >
> >
> >  With the best regards,
> >  Aleksey Bragin. 
>
>  This is very formal and is not in any way threatening. I would
>  appreciate having your last comment be recanted due to it creates a
>  hostile environment. We are gentlemen here.
>
>
>  Thank you for your time answering this,
>  Sincerely,
>  James Tabor
>   _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>

[Aleksey Bragin]

Thanks for descriptive, and, what's even more important, a neutral,  
answer, without mutual blamings of someone (be it me, Magnus, or  
anyone else), I highly appreciate that.

We'll work out something for future, I'm sure, but there is no such  
thing as overdependence. It's like saying, "Magnus took whole DirectX  
development into his hands, it created an overdependance on him since  
noone else dared to touch this area". Or, "Alex Ionescu rewrote  
critical parts of the kernel, and it created an overdependance on  
him". I think you agree that sounds just silly, but that was  
absolutely the same what you were saying :)


With the best regards,
Aleksey Bragin.

On Jun 25, 2008, at 9:30 PM, Zachary Gorden wrote:

>   Since I'm stuck at work without IRC, I need to do
> this the old  
>  fashioned way during my lunch break.  I've followed the general  
>  discussion thanks to the IRC logs of other people, so here goes.
>
>  First, Aleksey, you said that the intial blowup occurred because  
>  Magnus went public and etc with what you said was a private issue  
>  between him and you.  But you also said that his development/commit  
>  pattern was hurting the project.  If that was the case, then I  
>  personally don't think it should have stayed an issue between just  
>  the two of you.  If his changes were that disruptive, it's a matter  
>  that every member of the project needs to help deal with.  And this  
>  should be the case no matter who the person is.
>  Second, the need for a "repository coordinator" or someone besides  
>  yourself who has the ability to add and remove commit access is not  
>  merely an administrative matter.  The lack of such a person placed  
>  more strain on you in the recent incident because the only person  
>  Magnus could go to after his commit access was limited was you, a  
>  person who had become extremely frustrated with him.  Frustration  
>  can go both ways, as both of you became pissed at the other.  Not  
>  the best mood to be in to resolve issues.  While you, as the  
>  project coordinator, are the one who lays down a general direction  
>  for the project, it doesn't mean you need to act as the enforcer.   
>  Having one or two people who overlap in certain areas of  
>  responsibility helps let you avoid becoming too entangled in one  
>  particular issue and becoming too personally invested in it.  In a  
>  major disagreement, that is definitely something to avoid.
>
>  The number of developers is still small, so it's not out of the  
>  ordinary that you pay personal attention to things you think are  
>  important or problematic.  That's also not a bad thing, but you  
>  could easily become overextended and overworked.  It also creates  
>  an overdependence on you for certain, mundane matters, which  
>  further spread you thin.  You also may forget or not even be aware  
>  that a certain someone else may be able to help you with a specific  
>  issue, simply because that person never found such an issue falling  
>  into his/her (one day) field of responsibility.
>
>  There are plenty of people around you who can help you deal with  
>  these matters, just trust us to stay on the path you set.  Even if  
>  you feel a developer isn't complying, that doesn't mean you  
>  personally need to go after them.  The rest of us are here and if  
>  we know of the problem and how serious you think it is, we'd be  
>  able to help.
>
>  Anyways, that's my say in this entire affair.  Also, the me logged  
>  in right now is my comp at home, for logging purposes, so I won't  
>  respond on IRC until I get home.