Zemlin on the Linux Foundation's by-law changes

Posted Jan 23, 2016 18:56 UTC (Sat) by trenton (guest, #106520)
In reply to: Zemlin on the Linux Foundation's by-law changes by pboddie
Parent article: Zemlin on the Linux Foundation's by-law changes

> the things that you don't consider to have "merit" have been regarded as essential aspects of any complete software project for quite some time.

As far as I understood the previous conversation, by saying 'non-merit factors' OP meant things like gender and sexual orientation, which were key factors in OPW candidate selection process. To be honest, I don't think that they 'have been regarded as essential aspects of any complete software project for quite some time', nor they should be regarded as such.

Zemlin on the Linux Foundation's by-law changes

Posted Jan 30, 2016 15:06 UTC (Sat) by pboddie (guest, #50784) [Link]

Just to rectify any misunderstanding here, the OP suggested that OPW projects (unlike GSoC projects) involved things that were not "true programming", suggesting a connection between gender and the ability to do "true programming".

My point was that even the things that the OP does not ostensibly regard as having any merit (a separate issue to any "merit" in selection criteria) are actually essential parts of programming and software development, specifically things like documentation (not the other stuff regarding selection criteria, just to repeat myself).

It would be absurd to suggest that gender and sexual orientation are essential aspects of software development, but if anyone appears to believe such a thing, it would be the OP, not me.

(I have nothing to add on the topic of bureaucracy in what amounts to a corporate "slush fund" with a bit of programming being done on the side. My apologies for extending the thread purely to clarify the above.)