From bret at pettichord.com Thu Jun 22 02:16:31 2006 From: bret at pettichord.com (Bret Pettichord) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:16:31 -0500 Subject: [Wtr-core] An Apology and A Request Message-ID: I recently ran across Carl Shaulis's blog post (http://onthewatirfront.blogspot.com/2006/03/recorder-controversy.html) about the recorder debate that happened several month's back. I regret how i handled that. Scott Hanselman was correct to say I handled it with a lack of grace. After years of test-tool BS from the commercial test tool vendors, i have little patiences for it. What I regret most, is not that Marcus took his tool away. I think that was coming anyhow, but rather how my comments interrupted a community process. There was a pretty clear consensus that he needed his own list, and he was pretty resistant to the idea. It would have been better if i had just stayed out of it. You all and many others have invested time and reputation in Watir, and i owe you all more of a say in the community. I owe a special apology to Jonathan Kohl, for snapping at him in particular. Jonathan has been a key contributor to Watir from the early days and has never done anything to offend me. I'm still pretty uninterested in recorders per se, although i love Microsoft's IE developer toolbar ( http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038&displaylang=en ). But i'm becoming more and more interested in opening up the Watir development process and sharing my design ideas. As i get more contributions, i'm finding that i have strong opinions about changes i want to make with Watir, and i think i owe it to the community both to explain my views and to consider other thinking. This is hard for me, because i have strong opinions that i've developed over a long time. Also, it is often much easier for me to rewrite someone's contribution than it is for me to explain why i think it needs to be rewritten. I think this is an important part of wrapping up the 1.5 release. There are a number of new features and i want to get community confirmation of many of the details before we make a complete release. Some of these discussions have been on wtr-general. I've also recently set up wtr-development as a place where the more technical discussions can happen without befuddling the general users. I'd like your help with this. Both to participate in these discussions, as well as to let me know if you have any suggestions for how to make these go better. Bret -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/wtr-core/attachments/20060622/2bf38b51/attachment-0001.html From jkohl at telusplanet.net Thu Jun 22 15:58:44 2006 From: jkohl at telusplanet.net (Jonathan Kohl) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:58:44 -0600 Subject: [Wtr-core] An Apology and A Request In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c69636$4632c2d0$6500a8c0@tintin> > You all and many others have invested time and reputation in > Watir, and i owe you all more of a say in the community. I > owe a special apology to Jonathan Kohl, for snapping at him > in particular. Jonathan has been a key contributor to Watir > from the early days and has never done anything to offend me. Thanks for the apology Bret, I appreciate it. We have such similar views on testing in general, and you have been a huge influence in my test automation work. -Jonathan From charley.baker at gmail.com Thu Jun 22 16:13:09 2006 From: charley.baker at gmail.com (Charley Baker) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:13:09 -0600 Subject: [Wtr-core] An Apology and A Request In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Opening up the Watir development process and sharing your vision sounds like a brilliant idea, you've got a particular attachment to it since you've really brought it out and made it a viable tool for the past couple of years. And on that note, danke shane or something like that. I wish I had the words to thank you and the other contributors. I've been busy lately and so haven't had the opportunity to contribute as much as I'd like to, but I've decided to commit some time each day to this project regardless of my current workload. -Charley On 6/22/06, Bret Pettichord < bret at pettichord.com> wrote: > > I recently ran across Carl Shaulis's blog post > (http://onthewatirfront.blogspot.com/2006/03/recorder-controversy.html ) > about the recorder debate that happened several month's back. I regret > how i handled that. Scott Hanselman was correct to say I handled it > with a lack of grace. After years of test-tool BS from the commercial > test tool vendors, i have little patiences for it. > > What I regret most, is not that Marcus took his tool away. I think > that was coming anyhow, but rather how my comments interrupted a > community process. There was a pretty clear consensus that he needed > his own list, and he was pretty resistant to the idea. It would have > been better if i had just stayed out of it. > > You all and many others have invested time and reputation in Watir, > and i owe you all more of a say in the community. I owe a special > apology to Jonathan Kohl, for snapping at him in particular. Jonathan > has been a key contributor to Watir from the early days and has never > done anything to offend me. > > I'm still pretty uninterested in recorders per se, although i love > Microsoft's IE developer toolbar > (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038&displaylang=en > ). > But i'm becoming more and more interested in opening up the Watir > development process and sharing my design ideas. As i get more > contributions, i'm finding that i have strong opinions about changes i > want to make with Watir, and i think i owe it to the community both to > explain my views and to consider other thinking. This is hard for me, > because i have strong opinions that i've developed over a long time. > Also, it is often much easier for me to rewrite someone's contribution > than it is for me to explain why i think it needs to be rewritten. > > I think this is an important part of wrapping up the 1.5 > release. There are a number of new features and i want to get > community confirmation of many of the details before we make a > complete release. Some of these discussions have been on > wtr-general. I've also recently set up wtr-development as a place > where the more technical discussions can happen without befuddling the > general users. > > I'd like your help with this. Both to participate in these > discussions, as well as to let me know if you have any suggestions for > how to make these go better. > > Bret > > > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-core mailing list > Wtr-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-core > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/wtr-core/attachments/20060622/5af3de50/attachment.html From jeff.darklight at gmail.com Thu Jun 22 16:56:09 2006 From: jeff.darklight at gmail.com (Jeff Wood) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:56:09 -0700 Subject: [Wtr-core] An Apology and A Request In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Bret, I'm glad to still be around in this ... I really hope to be able to commit more work on helping get Watir ( and FireWatir ) all working ... This still has the potential to be as large as Rails as a win for the Ruby community if we can get both of those working and simply have an abstraction that works for both ... Anyways ... I'm still here, and will continue to be ... hopefully I'll be able to commit more time to things as well ... I've continued to be buried on project after project and hopefully, that'll cool out soon. Ciao for now, and thank you for your work. You *are* appreciated. Even if we don't say it enough. --jw. On 6/22/06, Charley Baker wrote: > Opening up the Watir development process and sharing your vision sounds > like a brilliant idea, you've got a particular attachment to it since you've > really brought it out and made it a viable tool for the past couple of > years. And on that note, danke shane or something like that. > > I wish I had the words to thank you and the other contributors. I've been > busy lately and so haven't had the opportunity to contribute as much as I'd > like to, but I've decided to commit some time each day to this project > regardless of my current workload. > > -Charley > > > > On 6/22/06, Bret Pettichord < bret at pettichord.com> wrote: > > > > I recently ran across Carl Shaulis's blog post > (http://onthewatirfront.blogspot.com/2006/03/recorder-controversy.html > ) > about the recorder debate that happened several month's back. I regret > how i handled that. Scott Hanselman was correct to say I handled it > with a lack of grace. After years of test-tool BS from the commercial > test tool vendors, i have little patiences for it. > > What I regret most, is not that Marcus took his tool away. I think > that was coming anyhow, but rather how my comments interrupted a > community process. There was a pretty clear consensus that he needed > his own list, and he was pretty resistant to the idea. It would have > been better if i had just stayed out of it. > > You all and many others have invested time and reputation in Watir, > and i owe you all more of a say in the community. I owe a special > apology to Jonathan Kohl, for snapping at him in particular. Jonathan > has been a key contributor to Watir from the early days and has never > done anything to offend me. > > I'm still pretty uninterested in recorders per se, although i love > Microsoft's IE developer toolbar > ( > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038&displaylang=en). > But i'm becoming more and more interested in opening up the Watir > development process and sharing my design ideas. As i get more > contributions, i'm finding that i have strong opinions about changes i > want to make with Watir, and i think i owe it to the community both to > explain my views and to consider other thinking. This is hard for me, > because i have strong opinions that i've developed over a long time. > Also, it is often much easier for me to rewrite someone's contribution > than it is for me to explain why i think it needs to be rewritten. > > I think this is an important part of wrapping up the 1.5 > release. There are a number of new features and i want to get > community confirmation of many of the details before we make a > complete release. Some of these discussions have been on > wtr-general. I've also recently set up wtr-development as a place > where the more technical discussions can happen without befuddling the > general users. > > I'd like your help with this. Both to participate in these > discussions, as well as to let me know if you have any suggestions for > how to make these go better. > > Bret > > > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-core mailing list > Wtr-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-core > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wtr-core mailing list > Wtr-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wtr-core > >