i might flag this because the statement is to vague to merit any public discussion outside of the people involved. all we get is speculations and accusations, that are not worthy of a discussion on hackernews, in my opinion.
Also note that the accusation is clear: Hans doesn't respect anything proposed by the ComCo, making it useless despite their clear mandate, personally undercutting the ComCo members with vague accusations.
And someone has tried the same here
that doesn't seem to be happening here.
You're involved in this?
i am an f-droid user, and i am certainly concerned if there are issues in the community. but this post does not help to enlighten matters and i feel it will only attract vocal outsiders who have nothing substantial to contribute.
this issue needs to be handled internally by the active f-droid contributors, and if they are not issuing public statements with details on what is actually going on then the rest of us should stand back.
i doubt any message here is going to be helpful in resolving issues or even just learning more.
https://web.archive.org/web/20231117190207/https://gitlab.co...
Issue 448 is said to be relevant as well, and similarly hidden, but isn't available on archive.
The fact that a remaining project member seems to be actively hiding otherwise public discussion which would keep us more informed, seems to itself be noteworthy ("Because I felt like it" was the reason given). Indeed, that action seems to be an example of the unilateral and arbitrary exercise of power with which the former contributors are raising concerns.
One wonders if a precedent can be set for getting an HN story of potential wrongdoing buried by hiding or destroying reports or evidence of it.
I don't know what more do you want ? As you said we won't solve anything but with such important issues I want to be informed and not hidden and flagged.
Especially since the current plan for the mentionned Hans is to continue business as usual with no change ...
What a truly odd sentiment from someone with an apparent interest in open-source community-led projects.
i find that dragging disputes into the public is often used for one side to draw support in their favor. i don't think that this is happening here, as the statements made are to vague. but in general i am not a fan of making such things public as it prevents people who are involved from opening up and sharing their concerns in the internal discussion for fear of having them made public too.
we need to give people in dispute the space to resolve their issues without forcing them to face the court of public opinion.
Of course not, nor did I imply such an extreme.
> we need to give people in dispute the space to resolve their issues without forcing them to face the court of public opinion.
This only functions with balanced moderating forces within an internal dispute - where there is a clear power imbalance (e.g. a technical lead who holds exclusive keys to things), resolution of a dispute in private will typically lean heavily in favour of those holding defacto power, leaving "the court of public opinion" a sole remaining last resort.
just look at this case. from our perspective here, there are only two options: hans continues as before, or hans is entirely removed from the project. i don't see any way to come to a solution where both sides continue to be able to work together.
such a solution is only possible before the naming and shaming in public begins.
an amicable solution requires that the parties involved can speak without fear of retribution. dragging this into the public makes that pretty much impossible.
if the parties can not solve the problem on their own, they can find mediators (from their community or from outside) to help. if that is not enough the inner community, the active contributors can get involved, and only if that fails too, it may be right to make the issue public. but, at that point the choices usually have already been made (as we can see here again, with some of the people involved resigning) and our public opinion and discussion here can do nothing that would improve the situation.
Mediation is typically only possible where either both parties are willing (clearly not the case here) or where the mediator has some leverage with any unwilling parties (seemingly not to be found here either, at least sofar).
> the power issue can not be solved by the court of public opinion
Honestly you may well be right but this is precisely why I cited it as an unfortunate last resort. It's pretty clear here that even the very formation of the council was in itself an attempt at internal mediation after years of problems.
As unlikely as it is that going public will lead to a solution whereby the council members rejoin the existing project and have a long and fruitful collaborative relationship with Hans into the future, it does at least open the door for a larger number of potentially beneficial options.
Even the "nuclear" option (fork and rival), while wasteful in terms of human effort, has some potential to lead to a project that much better serves the open source community. Having such discussions in an open forum can help people better weigh up the pros & cons of joining vs forking indispensable community projects such as this.