LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  March 2012

CODE4LIB March 2012

Subject:

Re: Q.: MARC8 vs. MARC/Unicode and pymarc and misencoded III records

From:

Jon Gorman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:48:23 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (44 lines)

> It used to be that way, at least it was this way when I grew up in open
> source (in the 90s, before Eric Raymond invented the term). And it makes
> sense, for successful projects that have at least a moderate number of
> users.  Just dumping your code on github helps very few people.


You realize this isn't Apache, right?  It seems a small project,
mostly maintained by folks as they get time.  There's no SCRUM
meetings or hallway meetings, no foundation, no checklist.  Surely you
can't generalize two interactions first as reflective as the "culture
of open source".  It seems to have been a small piece of code shared
so others wouldn't have to do it over again and it's grown with time.
The primary thrust seems to be for library developers, not catalogers
or folks learning python code.

The typo you bought up was patched by one of the "team-members" within
a hour or two from what I can tell.  (Assuming you meant issue #22
https://github.com/edsu/pymarc/issues/22).  From what I can tell
someone patched it in less than an hour.

In general though github is the sourceforge of years past, but even
better.  It seems entirely reasonable to ask for a patch to me.
Perhaps it could have been handled more delicately by both sides.
Perhaps you weren't treated as nicely as you'd like.  There's probably
some truth to that.  But at the same time, Ed did include a wink at
the end after requesting the patch.  Had you perhaps cut him some
slack instead of immediately responding incredulously  you'd find it
was fixed when he got time. Or not.  He has his own priorities as do
other folks who contributed to the code.

If you're unhappy with the dump on github approach, then don't use the
software.  No one ran around forcing folks to do it.  It's one of
those lightweight github approaches, just another approach to open
source software.  In all the years I've also been involved with open
source every project has had it's own unique culture.  There's
responsibility on the user before using software to figure out what it
is.  If it doesn't meet their expectation, I see little reason that
the developer should feel compelled to change unless they're getting
paid for the work.  Obviously some people have found the "dump on
github" approach useful if they've contributed patches.

Can't we all just shake hands virtually or something?

Jon Gorman

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager