Seriously, on the historical timescale of kingdoms, democracy is a very young concept. It's only really after WWII that democracy got promoted to this almost utopian ideal that we know it as today. It's not a all given that it's the "best" way to run a society - as Churchill famously noted, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms".
To dial the abstraction a little back, it's a well known mode for software projects to die, when they cease being a labour of love of a small dedicated team with clear purpose and direction and starts trying to be all things to all people through "democracy"/"design by committee". Of course, plenty of projects have survived and flourished too.
I don't think that makes much sense. Besides trying to understand what "best" means, what does "have a king" mean? Does the UK's queen count as still having a king? What about Canada's queen?
Let's take Spain as a sample. The king abdicated in 1873, with the First Spanish Republic (parliament) until the end of 1874. Then was the Bourbon restoration where the king first had parliament, but later backed a dictator) until 1931. Then the Second Spanish Republic until 1939 and the rise of Franco's dicatorship, until 1976, followed by a transition to parliamentary democracy, with the first elections in 1977.
That's 3 different transitions to a republican form of government. Two were not successful.
Or, how do you count the English Civil War and the brief Commonwealth of England in the 1650s?
What of the short-lived French Republic? The result of the Haitian Revolution? The democracy of Iran overthrown in 1953 by royalist forces supported and funded by CIA and MI6, and then the monarchy overthrown in 1979 by the Iranian Revolution?
Or Weimar Republic Germany, after the imperialism of the First World War. It famously had to deal with hyperinflation from paying war reparations. In 1930, President Hindenburg assumed dictatorial emergency powers, leading towards the end of the constitution and the start of Nazi Germany in 1933. The belief in Germany at the time, I'm told, was that the Weimar era showed that democracy was a failure.
Also, what's your baseline reference? "Is it best to have a king first then later transition to democracy" compared to ... what?
The important distinction between a software project an a government is the ease of transition.
Democracy is good because (if well designed) it protects the rights of the minority as well as the majority. But a dictatorship can use resources much more efficiently to accomplish it's goals.
Since programmers can easily switch frameworks it is better to have each guided by a strong and idealistic central leader.
I think that sounds like an good observation. At first, you have to establish the foundation and ground rules - and fight off all the usual people who try to claim the project for themselves and head it in their own direction. After that is done, and a culture has been established, your own role as a maintainer becomes more contributory than managerial.
Consider the ratification of the current US constitution. It was debated and written in secret, ratified with no 'general public' debate on the final draft.
Adrian & Jacob built a great framework, but more importantly they helped oversee the building of an awesome community and ecosystem over the last 8-9 years. Thank you both!
Indeed, but I think we've come to learn that frameworks and communities don't exist in vaccums and are probably one and the same, especially speaking as someone who had to start learning it from scratch and ask people for a lot of help.
It is so easy to get turned away from learning a framework, if the most visible people in the community are assholes.
All in all, a nice reminder that programming and developer communities like Django are about something much bigger than slinging code and reducing performance bottlenecks - nations unto themselves. I think that'll be the biggest legacy and impact people like Jacob in particular will leave us.
I think a project that is to continue to be relevant for the long-term needs a vision, and that that comes from a leader. Once the leader is gone, the vision doesn't develop. At some point the original vision will no longer fit the changing circumstances around the project, and either a new leader and a new vision will emerge or the project will fade away (or both, if the new vision doesn't work).
On the other hand, if at some point the original vision is accepted by the mainstream, the project will be successful and popular for a while, the more so if it ceases to move on and develop its vision. Then at some point the project will fade away as the Next Big Thing arrives.
It's not always possible for a project born of one vision to adapt to a new reality - even if the leaders can foresee it perfectly - without starting afresh.
Given that, and that the skills and personality needed to "maintain" a mainstream project are different to those needed to develop and make concrete a vision, it's good that creators move on.
To me, Adrian and Jacob moving on is a sign of Django's settling into the mainstream. It'll stick around for a while, and then it will fade away. The Next Big Thing is on its way.
To Adrian and Jacob - I hope you enjoy your new ventures; and thanks.
I don't think this is something to criticise really. For life really does mean as long as they can do it and have an interest in doing it. Sometimes it's really hard to let go, even if you're not involved with the project as much as you'd like to. I'm impressed when people can make that kind of decision before the lack of leadership/interest causes some issues.
Same reaction as to the pope stepping down - it's much better for the community if you don't keep a position where you can't do much work.
[+] [-] thatthatis|12 years ago|reply
Is it best to have a king first then later transition to democracy?
It would seem that kings followed later by parliament has been a very successful model for django.
I don't know how far this generalizes.
[+] [-] mseebach|12 years ago|reply
Yes.
Seriously, on the historical timescale of kingdoms, democracy is a very young concept. It's only really after WWII that democracy got promoted to this almost utopian ideal that we know it as today. It's not a all given that it's the "best" way to run a society - as Churchill famously noted, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms".
To dial the abstraction a little back, it's a well known mode for software projects to die, when they cease being a labour of love of a small dedicated team with clear purpose and direction and starts trying to be all things to all people through "democracy"/"design by committee". Of course, plenty of projects have survived and flourished too.
[+] [-] dalke|12 years ago|reply
Let's take Spain as a sample. The king abdicated in 1873, with the First Spanish Republic (parliament) until the end of 1874. Then was the Bourbon restoration where the king first had parliament, but later backed a dictator) until 1931. Then the Second Spanish Republic until 1939 and the rise of Franco's dicatorship, until 1976, followed by a transition to parliamentary democracy, with the first elections in 1977.
That's 3 different transitions to a republican form of government. Two were not successful.
Or, how do you count the English Civil War and the brief Commonwealth of England in the 1650s?
What of the short-lived French Republic? The result of the Haitian Revolution? The democracy of Iran overthrown in 1953 by royalist forces supported and funded by CIA and MI6, and then the monarchy overthrown in 1979 by the Iranian Revolution?
Or Weimar Republic Germany, after the imperialism of the First World War. It famously had to deal with hyperinflation from paying war reparations. In 1930, President Hindenburg assumed dictatorial emergency powers, leading towards the end of the constitution and the start of Nazi Germany in 1933. The belief in Germany at the time, I'm told, was that the Weimar era showed that democracy was a failure.
Also, what's your baseline reference? "Is it best to have a king first then later transition to democracy" compared to ... what?
[+] [-] recuter|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jrochkind1|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jisaacstone|12 years ago|reply
Democracy is good because (if well designed) it protects the rights of the minority as well as the majority. But a dictatorship can use resources much more efficiently to accomplish it's goals.
Since programmers can easily switch frameworks it is better to have each guided by a strong and idealistic central leader.
I'm thinking about PHP vs Python
[+] [-] kmfrk|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] enlightenedfool|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unethical_ban|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] randlet|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kmfrk|12 years ago|reply
It is so easy to get turned away from learning a framework, if the most visible people in the community are assholes.
All in all, a nice reminder that programming and developer communities like Django are about something much bigger than slinging code and reducing performance bottlenecks - nations unto themselves. I think that'll be the biggest legacy and impact people like Jacob in particular will leave us.
[+] [-] craigkerstiens|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] erichurkman|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nwp90|12 years ago|reply
On the other hand, if at some point the original vision is accepted by the mainstream, the project will be successful and popular for a while, the more so if it ceases to move on and develop its vision. Then at some point the project will fade away as the Next Big Thing arrives.
It's not always possible for a project born of one vision to adapt to a new reality - even if the leaders can foresee it perfectly - without starting afresh.
Given that, and that the skills and personality needed to "maintain" a mainstream project are different to those needed to develop and make concrete a vision, it's good that creators move on.
To me, Adrian and Jacob moving on is a sign of Django's settling into the mainstream. It'll stick around for a while, and then it will fade away. The Next Big Thing is on its way.
To Adrian and Jacob - I hope you enjoy your new ventures; and thanks.
[+] [-] bkeating|12 years ago|reply
> (But please, no more Django Pony. It's stupid.)
Hear, hear!
[+] [-] thezoid|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mhurron|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbeja|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smnrchrds|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mixmastamyk|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sneak|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] viraptor|12 years ago|reply
Same reaction as to the pope stepping down - it's much better for the community if you don't keep a position where you can't do much work.
[+] [-] indiefan|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andybak|12 years ago|reply
Or rather - no I don't - what are you talking about?
[+] [-] leephillips|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pekk|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] adrianh|12 years ago|reply
-Adrian
[+] [-] kabisote|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rbanffy|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] biscotti|12 years ago|reply
Jacobs post: http://jacobian.org/writing/retiring-as-bdfls/
[+] [-] sp332|12 years ago|reply