Tante tante tante ...
Your post above came across pretty harsh and wrong I have to say !!
Devs paid ... I would call that maybe a tip !!!
These boys are working their (skinny) a... off and I do not think it is fair to shout for code review ! Did anything ever sneak by them ? No, so highest respect for everybody involved and keeping us afloat ... That goes from Evan to udjin , flare , crowning .... Incl all you testers who are testing that we do not fall on our nose !!
Vertoe reference , I do not get it !
Wow, I really did not come across at all! The video was mostly about how to run an open source project with an emphasis on "poisonous people" even so some poisonous people are great people, they can poison and suck up energy for a project in many ways, and that the consensus of the group ought to guide a project. Hence the Vertoe reference. Great team member, but wanted the project to go in a different direction but consensus was otherwise. At that point you have to let a member go rather than let the project be torn apart. But it also had other great tips, one was, IMO, noting mistakes, so - lets say we tried cryptonote, but it caused such a bloated block chain or inability to implement blockchain trimming or something. You would write on your list of mistakes under cryptonote, exactly why this was abandoned as an idea due to 1, 2, 3. So that in a few years when we have an entirely new set of developers, and they think, "hey, why didn't we ever do cryptonote" they can be directed to the mistakes log, and then they can say "oh yah, that never worked and they spent 5 months trying to make it work with a. b. and c., none of which worked out.
At that point, they can say, "but d. was never tried" or " but so and so group resolved that problem, maybe we should try this again"
Now that's not really the best example, but something like, oh we tried this voting scheme, but there was that issue, and that's why we chose this other way to do it, because it integrates better with this function.... etc... Small things that could easily cause wasted time revisiting and arguing over.
And I certainly never ever intended to insult the work our developers and volunteers do! Heavens no! Gosh, I'm really not communicating. I think I was talking about what I was hearing in this lecture, and you all weren't with me, inside my mind, and I was screwing up what I was trying to express. Sorry if I've offended!
Re-reading what I wrote, though, I honestly can't see how it could have come off THAT badly. I just meant that we will need to keep people from just dumping huge code, working on it in a vacuum... like they said in the video, because it must integrate with the whole (maybe it doesn't and I'm wrong there??:?) and it would be unfair to the other developers, the core developers, etc... to give them 6 months worth of work in one pile, never seen by anyone before and expect them to add it to the core project. It's best if work is done as a team, rather than in a vacuum, but since some of these projects might be coming from the "outside" and require integration into the core project, that certain rules should be set up to protect and respect the projects and the core developer's time and energy. I actually intended to suggest respect for core developer's time and energy.
