Re: Some Points, about Arabeyes [Part I]

[Muhammad Alkarouri <malkarouri at yahoo dot co dot uk>]

First of all, this is a very good reply. I know that some points need to be
clarified.

 --- Arafat Medini <lumina at silverpen dot de> wrote: > 
> Disclaimer: speaking of the fact that ppl come and go to this project
> and that our #working# contributors are very few, based on this fact I
> am answering this mail.

You have total right to reply, as everybody else. In fact I/we need these
replies.

> I think that the project is still too small to be too burocratic. I
> think that YES some day in the future your (good) idea may be adopted
> but today it's too much burocracy for a few ppl.

Well, you need bureaucracy just as the size of the project. Large projects need
large setup. See below.

> 
> > I have some suggestions that I hope you may consider:
> > 
> > 1. Documentation on Arabeyes policies needs to be improved in two
> dimensions:
> >    a. Historical records of valuable discussions need to exist
> 
> The problem is here, what is valuable?

This is left as an exercise for the reader. However, at least major
undertakings, successful or failed, are valuable enough for me.

> In the case of very critical discussions and points of view we have the
> WIKI which gained very much acceptance btw the users, maybe I am the
> only one who doesn't know how to use the WIKI ;) (what a shame...)
> But the wiki as a tool proved to be very good, accepted and indeed
> helpful!

Then let's use the wiki for my suggestions.

> 
> >    b. Arabeyes policies and general 'agreed-upon' things need to be widely
> > known and easily accessible.
> 
> I am very unsure regarding this point. Does the majority of ppl who only
> pass by Arabeyes have the right to know about our decisions?
> hmm,well I don't really know. (really) 

It is a matter open for discussion.. I in general prefer openness.

> AND whith the distinction that Arabeyes is a meta project, Arabeyes
> itself has NOTHING to speak about, because it is nothing #real#!!!
> Under it's umbrella decisions are made, ppl meet, etc...
> but there isn't any Arabeyes roadmap cz arabeyes doesn't stand for a
> special project.

I think Arabeyes stands for something. It has enough specific goals to be real.
You know, KDE and GNOME have more or less the meta-project status, specially
KDE as the core, QT, is actually more or less outside the general KDE
community.
By the way, expect something about the status and 'personality' of Arabeyes in
part II..

> The problems you spoke about accured, that's true but it's more the
> preference of a hacker to have more personal contact with others that
> makes him IMHO contact via irc.

First, I had to give specific examples for people to understand me. Any example
that is refuted as a singular case will lead me to give another example of the
same nature. I didn't come to these suggestions in a day..

> 
> For the moslem/arab problem I think it's more of a cultural problem that
> even if we do a manifesto will hount us with many new members coming to
> the project. cz it's more the culture itself that stands in the
> foreground and not Arabeyes's manifesto IMHO.
> 

Yes. I don't want to discuss this at least in this thread (believe me I have an
opinion). The thing is that we should have an agreed upon database of some
sort. If a new person comes and says 'I am for/against topic X' we tell him/her
'please look in page somewhere' where he will find the current policy and the
major ideas for/against. If he/she wants to negotiate that policy s is another
matter, and he/she has to abide by the old policy till the change is passed
(probably by core). This may serve even for non-policies: e.g. Arabeyes is not
a GPL or BSD shop, you can use either..

> 
> > Suggestion: 
> > a. Use a kind of Request for Comment (RFC) of Policy Enhancement Proposal
> > (PEP).
> 
> I am not against this. But my Q would be then: how burocratic is this?
> If it's not so burocratic then it's ok else it'll be good to find
> someone he wants to make this on himself maybe you? ;)
> 

Good. Something like that:
- Somebody makes an e-mail suggestion, as a policy proposal. Formatted good
enough.
- People comment for some time, say two weeks
- Core looks into it after that and based on previous discussions, it takes
decision: choose option A,B (e.g.) or no policy exist.
- The important point: This is documented, usually by the original proposer, or
y core.

On another thought, in a wiki/arabeyes like way:
Something like the wiki:  QacDiscussions/WordForum
(http://wiki.arabeyes.org/QacDiscussions_2fWordForum)
Just add the following formalities:
When you actually take the decision, note it immediately after the policy's
title (the level 2 header), with dates, of course. 

> 
> Well that's what ppl are doing from time to time.
> 

Just make 'from time to time' always..

> > b. All important correspondence should be through public e-mail, as it is
> > already archived. In case there is some good reason to do otherwise in a
> > particular project, a feedback channel should be established frequently
> enough
> > to get any possible contributors, coordination between two projects, etc.
> This
> > should be the maintainers responsibility.
> 
> Here I am more skeptical, if the goal is to tell every newbie what's the
> way to contact, then I'll tell you that different ppl prefer different
> ways; many use private mail as the first way of contacting cz they are
> too shy or they don't know about ML, others use mailing lists, while
> others use irc. in some cases wiki is used too!
> It's not right to force a newbie to use a specific way of contacting us.
> A newbie is a ptotential hacker/translator he's a king till he starts
> work then he becomes our slave MUAHAHA ;D

Good point. I am not going to tell you about a certain way to contact. I want a
feed back every now and then, after every large step _and_ after each month
(say) as a keep alive. And this is for the maintainers, which are not usually
that kind of newbie.
For example, if we are participating in GNOME the we need a feedback every
major action and every month, like is already happening now :)
My case was that we didn't have a feedback in adding BiDi to newt while we
could have used it for fedora/mandrake/etc. Remember, there is always another
example, if you wish..

> 
> For every other point I agree with you.
> 

Thanks, now I have heavy support:)

> > 2. In all projects, enough research should be done in the start so as not
> to
> > duplicate other work done in other places, or at least to give good reasons
> for
> > doing so. This includes duplicating work in Arabeyes, but also includes
> > attempts to translate every single technical word without referring to
> various
> > Arabization projects (not web based) and authorities around the Arab
> world[2].
> > 
> 
> I am for duplicating work, and I'll tell you why: I think a hacker has
> the freedom to work on whatever he wants, if he can make his passion
> come true we will have two projects competing with the same energy and
> passion to make the best technology. Telling someone to stop and work on
> another project mayb make him loose interest.

Sure. I have duplicated work before. Just some reason why. Can be done by the
project maintainer, or by the person who suggested the project to a newbie. Let
us know. That is in developing and hacking.
But the point I was trying to deliver is related to some other work, usually
not programming. That includes anything that needs standardization; we should
not make two standards or depart from the standards already available. Don't
try to translate the word 'save' as 'ÏÓ', when every other person or authoritiy
uses a variant of 'ÍÝÙ'. Don't try to negotiate at what time is Fajr in
Hannover. And try not to do Windows-1256 before UTF-8, though this time you may
have good reasons (explain them).

> We are NOT a company, lately this company thinking is detroirating every
> linux project out there.

This is not company thinking, believe me. Elzubeir has tried to make the
developer's guide as a kind of standardization. I don't think whe was thinking
of himself as CEO, was he?

> Everyone does not want to duplicate work, what about KDE and gnome? BSD
> and Linux, gnumeric, abiword And OO.o, etc...

I got your point, it is the choice/standards dilemma.

Salam,
Muhammad Alkarouri


	
	
		
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html