Start of new

[joyously]

There is an open question on the table: whether to refork WP or continue as before with CP.
I think there is a bigger issue.

As far as I can tell, this is an open source project, where volunteers collaborate to produce some software they can all use, modify, and distribute freely.
But I am shocked to find that people in charge (who have access to the systems) want to keep discussions private. Don’t be surprised if this post disappears, or if I disappear because of this.

From the Red Hat page:

Open source software is developed in a decentralized and collaborative way, relying on peer review and community production. Open source software is often cheaper, more flexible, and has more longevity than its proprietary peers because it is developed by communities rather than a single author or company.

The key part of this definition is “decentralize and collaborative”, along with “peer review and community”.

How can we get more people involved if we have private discussions about what to do?

I want no part of this type of group. I think the whole group should know what is happening.

[Simone]

@viktor

The core contributors will discuss the results of the poll, the feedback given by the users, and what we can realistically accomplish.
…
Anyone willing to start contributing to the core should PM me

It was clearly announced.
I respect the fact you don’t like it but I see nothing hidden but simply limited to some people.

[timkaye]

I too respect the fact you don’t like it. However, I don’t respect the fact that you waited till now to voice your view. You could have done that much earlier. Being open works both ways.

[viktor]

There’s really nothing sensitive or private in that discussion, as the screenshot shows. But there is a reason to keep it private, at least while it’s active, to allow contributors to discuss the topic at hand without being affected by articles in WPTavern, social media mentions, others participating in a discussion they will not be doing actual work. Exactly what happened with the poll, and that was by design.

Some people didn’t like the poll and soliciting feedback, but that was necessary to understand what the community really wants from the project. This was an open space for everyone to share their feedback.

That served as the foundation for the core contributors to discuss how they want to proceed. Just like any good user-centric project, you gather user feedback and people who do the work decide how to proceed.

The private discussion would’ve been made public once it was complete and the path forward was chosen by the people that will be volunteering their time and skills to do the work on the core.

Community wants a lot, but we have to manage their wants based on what we can actually achieve with the small core team we have.

This is why petitions didn’t work, a lot of requests but not enough people are willing to do the work. This is why ClassicPress stalled for a bit, a lot of people talk but not enough people are willing to do the work. It’s really a balancing act, balance community needs vs the reality of what we can accomplish.

Learning from the past, these types of discussions generate unnecessary press and discussions that turn toxic and many people have left because of this.

If we keep doing things the way they were done, we’ll be in the same place we were just a few months ago. Not a good place.

Idealism stalled ClassicPress, we need to be realistic for the project to continue.

If you want ClassicPress to continue repeating history, you’re more than welcome to take my spot as a director and do things your way. You always criticize, but there’s never any follow-through.

You pushed code_potent out of TinyMCE v5 project (not intentionally), which he started, to only stop because you didn’t know how to make a decision on how to proceed. So we ended up losing a great community member and the whole project.

If you want things done your way, do them. Don’t just drive-by criticize here on the forum, on Slack, on GitHub.

Did you come to me or anyone else and say “Hey, I think this discussion needs to be public. Because XYZ.” Or “Why are we keeping this discussion private?” to try and understand the reasons behind it. Of course not, you drove by and criticized in this thread instead. As you always do

It’s 1st of the year and my resolution is to not take any BS from anyone this year.

You want to help ClassicPress, help! We appreciate any help we can get.

Please let me know when you would like to join the board and be a director.

[viktor]

The discussion is public but only read-only. The time for community feedback has past. Users who did offer feedback did say they trust core team to make necessary decisions, that’s what the team will do.

The Future of ClassicPress Discussion

This discussion will focus on the results of the poll and users’ feedback. It’s limited to core contributors (@Core_Committers) and will be kept private. Keeping this discussion on the forum, instead of Slack, ensures everyone can participate in the discussion without timezone limitations over the course of a few days/weeks. The option to re-fork has 20 votes while continue-as-is has 18. The goal of this discussion is to find a way forward. ClassicPress can’t be WordPress without Gutenberg, b…

[ElisabettaCarrara]

@viktor I think that it could have been done in another way. having discussions behind closed doors to me is no open-source project modus operandi, and I stated that many times already in the past.
I am no core contributor, so the thing is this post is not visible on my feed. And this in itself is a problem. there is no transparency and one has to “trust blindly” that everything is in the open. And at least to me, this is a problem considering the fact that the leaders are indeed managing money on behalf of the project and for the project’s good.

You could have made the post public, for example using the lounge, giving read access to everyone and write access only to core committers, that way everybody could have followed what the line of thought led out by the core contributors was, given the fact that everybody had the time to vote on the poll and express opinions so there was no need for community intervention.
This could have been a moment to show how the core team works in the open, transparently. A moment to build trust within the community (the community has voted, now core contributors discuss and you can read their reasons and the way they select a path based on what can be done mediated with the vote).
I voiced my opinions on that same matter and raised my complaints to the old leadership, and I am not afraid to speak up now again to say that closed doors is a not good enough policy for an open source project.
Can we try harder and be transparent about things? can we be really open and build trust?
Can we not repeat history time and time again?

[viktor]

Open-source doesn’t mean make everything public. Should I also post my DMs from Slack here? Or every email I sent from a ClassicPress account? Or maybe I should post credit card numbers and passwords?

Private discussions are necessary to avoid the unnecessary pleasantries. Such as negative press coverage, taking things out of context, unnecessary criticism that may affect ongoing discussion, accusations that make people leave, etc. We’ve seen what happened in June. They can be made public once complete.

It’s not against any open-source principles.

@ElisabettaCarrara

This could have been a moment to show how the core team works in the open, transparently.

Anyone can see how core team works every Thursday at 11am EST. Everyone is welcome to join.

To prevent this discussion from getting out of control, it will be closed.