Dravion wrote:Its not only the personal preferences its the whole thing that martin seems to give a shit about the community and decides something important just on his own
I just wonder where the notion of HMailserver is "the people's software" comes from. Im relatively new to HMS (4 years), and Im not very good with politics. But from what I see, read and understand from the past, this has always been Martin's concept, Martins project and Martin's decision on what is included and how it is to be put together.
I suspect the involvement of it being 'open' to you on Github is (understandably) misinterpreted. The benefit is that you can take it and do what you want for your own benefits (download the source and do what you want), and maybe you could even offer amendments, but ultimately Martin continues do his thing and do it in the direction he chooses as it is his
project. As I see it, this is no different from other 'open source' software such as, for example, the Mozilla offerings (FF and TB etc) - sure you can take the source, and offer objections and suggestions, but ultimately it's the key development team (of Mozilla) that decides the direction of the product. It really isnt a 'public contribution' project and doesnt look like it ever has been (save for feedback and suggestion
Im sure there are those that may try to counter my interpretation with an official stance of HMS similar to "open source, therefore contribution allowed etc". Im not talking about the official stance (if indeed it is
different from my interpretation), Im talking about the reality. 'Developer Bill' had an input in to HMS but ultimately it seems Martin always had the final decision about what and how to do things (a clash of personalities and methods ensued and Bill 'left', it seems). And it's not the first time I have had a discussion about these things and I am certainly not the only one seeing it in this way.
It is all about "perception". My perception is that you do not have a control about the direction of the product (and that most suggestions/votes will be ignored). Bills perception was that he was allowed to contribute and modify and have his code included in to product. Your perception is you should have some say on the platform and the direction of its future.
Perhaps if Martin kept the product a 'closed source' project that you had no access to then you wouldnt be so pissed off. You would download it, try it, like it/accept it OR dislike it/try another product (and then come back to HMS again
), and not feel so involved in it's future (and save you from this disappointment you feel).
I guess we just have to accept the product for what it is. Step forward, do your feedbacks and suggestions on Github, and then just step back again.