Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79769
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CABRjmp9JFC4dejiqW=V78FZjUw8RDNYyzSpEbTPw-fmx6wyXpA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAH-PCH6knEtQW3y40K7jedmEOFEEMA=GhqWL8UNZfxGKiOEJmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABRjmp9JFC4dejiqW=V78FZjUw8RDNYyzSpEbTPw-fmx6wyXpA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:30:32 +0100
Message-ID: <CAH-PCH46-oqJcWdWTRqdOK4msXv1PpXZwWRTmvPmBEHEotoScQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Florian Margaine <florian@margaine.com>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0163503c8db60a050a66209d
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] interesting read about challenges in the drupal organization
From: tyra3l@gmail.com (Ferenc Kovacs)

--089e0163503c8db60a050a66209d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Florian Margaine <florian@margaine.com>
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Le 17 d=C3=A9c. 2014 09:54, "Ferenc Kovacs" <tyra3l@gmail.com> a =C3=A9cr=
it :
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > while readon through
> http://www.garfieldtech.com/blog/on-drupals-leadership,
> > I've realized that there is a bunch of similarities between php interna=
ls
> > and drupal (which isn't that surprising), so I thought they guys around
> > there perceive the challenges/problems and the different possible
> solutions
> > for those.
> >
>
> I haven't read the article yet, but there is a fundamental difference
> between Drupal and php: Drupal has a BDFL.
>
you should check out the article, Larry also goes into details about the
topic, and how Drupal seem to try avoiding focusing to much power in one
hand and potential abuse which also has negative effects (lack of clarity
and the fear of making decisions).
relevant parts are:
"A good formal structure offers something that an informal structure
cannot: Clarity. If a new contributor wants to ask someone in a
"leadership" position if what they're proposing is consistent with the
project direction, goals, or software design, who should they ask? Me?
G=C3=A1bor? catch? xjm? Daniel Wehner? Tim Plunkett? Angie Byron? Alex
Bronstein? chx? Dries himself? Depending on the question the answer could
be very different; even among those "leaders" I doubt there's consensus on
which of them to ask, much less what the answer should be. That's actively
hostile to new contributors, because then they don't know if what they're
suggesting (be it big or small) would even be accepted until it's committed
(and occasionally not even then
<https://www.drupal.org/node/147723#comment-562659>). That is, it makes
most contributions spec work, even for those in de facto leadership
positions."

and

"If the movement continues deliberately to not select who shall exercise
power, it does not thereby abolish power. All it does is abdicate the right
to demand that those who do exercise power and influence be responsible for
it. If the movement continues to keep power as diffuse as possible because
it knows it cannot demand responsibility from those who have it... it
insures that the movement is as ineffective as possible."

really interesting read.

--=20
Ferenc Kov=C3=A1cs
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu

--089e0163503c8db60a050a66209d--