Why am I being ostracized?

[Oxymoron290]

If you are experienced in writing specifications, you're also welcome to join the effort.

So if I have no experience, I am not welcomed in this project and barred from getting the experience?

[Oxymoron290]

To clarify:
I think that comment on the Readme.md is a little too ingrained in the corporate/closed mindset. If this project is to be open as the licenses imply, then it's unnecessary and should be removed. Otherwise, the licenses changed to not include open collaboration.

[Oxymoron290]

alternatively, change "welcome" to "encouraged", which probably matches the intent better anyway. (I hope so anyway)

[bill-auger]

regarding the license: the current license does not actually imply open-ness at all; because it is a no-derivatives license - that is a real problem and most want to see it changed to something truly open; but that has not happened yet regarding participation: it actually was discussed, whether or not to close this github issue tracker; but it was decided to leave it open and the github README clearly states: ``` Non-members may use the GitHub issue tracker or send us a mail ... ``` that sentence was added specifically to allow everyone to participate in the discussions, both on github and on the mailing list; so absolutely no one is being "ostracized" as this issue title so bluntly claims - such confrontational insinuations are not productive - "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar", as the saying goes - there are an open issues on this github issue tracker each corresponding directly to each thread in the formal technical discussions - absolutely every person on the planet is "encouraged" to express their opinion; and there is nothing in the github README that would indicate to the contrary that README was written before the discussion began over six months ago - for the most part, the discussion topics were exhausted some months ago - it is quite clear now which features the spec needs to accommodate; and the work remaining to be done is to codify the spec and to work on implementations - the first reference implementation is nearly completed now regarding the specific language of the README itself: there is an alternate repo on notabug that includes a revised README - i expect that you will find the language in that one to be more plain and less emotionally charged; but because of the current licensing situation, the github repo has not been updated in some time https://notabug.org/peers/forgefed/

[bill-auger]

oh, as an update for the benefit of github subscribers, i should also add that a new IRC channel was created this week for the work related to the reference implementation (#vervis on freenode) - that too, is open to everyone

[Oxymoron290]

You mentioned several discussions and implied there are other issue trackers, repositories, etc. Can you provide links to useful, active, and open tools being used by this project? In addition to the one on notabug, I also found related information on dokk.org and framagit.org

Also, I can't tell or not, because the internet never does a good job and conveying feelings, but if you're peeved by my wording I apologize. I know you feel that it was confrontational and counter-productive, and from your perspective, I can respect that. However, from my perspective, as someone who has only known of this project for less than 48 hours, your response has been a treasure trove of information. So thank you for that. I look forward to participating further if you'll have me.

[bill-auger]

np bud - i have no desire to harp on any personal concerns on the internet - i will just say that it was the specific words you used that came across as inflammatory or more provocative than necessary - the word "ostracized" is not even applicable in this context - presumably, what you really meant was "why are inexperienced people excluded from the formal technical discussion" (or better yet: "why are the formal technical discussions conducted only by experienced people") - when stated that way, the reason should be obvious; and the question, less likely to be interpreted as an accusation as i mentioned, most of the important technical discussions have run their course; so the lack of activity on the mailing list is not an indication of a lack of interest or progress - for the most part, there is just not much to discuss at this stage, thats why the project may appear to be dormant - the previous discussions are readable on the framalistes website - that would be a great place to begin, catching up on what was discussed already https://framalistes.org/sympa/arc/git-federation the most activity and discussion recently have been in the #peers IRC channel on freenode and has been more general than technical - thats essentially the only "community" channel for now - not for any particular reason; but because folks in the peers group have been interested in something like even before this github repo was created - perhaps someday, forge-fed will have it's own website,, forum, or fediverse instance, or whatever; but if you want to "connect" with an interested community, thats probably all i can suggest for now the #vervis channel i mentioned is more specifically for working on the vervis forge, which we are treating as a reference implementation to work the bugs out of the activity-pub messaging logistics - once it is clear what the form of that looks like, some documentation can start being written in tandem with the reference implementation so, for now, neither the github repo or the notabug repo have much in them; but that is where the written documentation and any support libraries will eventually go - the two repos are out of sync now mostly for the reason that there is not much concrete to show - it is hoped that both repos will be mirrors in sync; but that is not very important until once the artifacts begin taking shape