I wanted to like you, I really did. But that is before you became so aggressive. What the hell?
What is the place for it then?
6 Likes
I told you it aināt appreciated to mass tag everybody. You confirm you are aware, making it a deliberate.
Feel free to open up an architectural issue with a suggestion for a change on project structure. Or continue discussion here with anybody deciding on their own to join the discussion or not (instead of being pulled into it).
Thank you, this is helpful. Very much so.
So, to summarise this thread:
The decisions are discussed in the architecture repo, except the ADR in question which was discussed behind closed doors. (source: Frenck)
The things that do get discussed in the architecture repo, even by senior devs, are unstructured and generally ignored unless Baloob is interested. This policy has caused very well regarded senior devs to stop contributing. (source: Amelchio)
When a certain person says he respects others opinion, tries never to be rude and is open to discussion. They actually mean the exact opposite. (game: guess who!)
@nickrout - I appreciate your time and effort to get to the bottom of this, but I think itās a lost cause. These answers arenāt coming anytime soon.
6 Likes
If you like to think of that that way. Sure. Go ahead.
There have been multiple architecture issues and discussions on the matter and now has been resolved using that ADR which has been set up with the core contributors. As it protects them for decisions they made and have been attacked for. It involved architectural and technical consequences mainly.
Sorry we have not consulted you personally. But to be honest, considering your attitude and comments in general, Iām frankly amazed to still see you around here. If you hate it all so much, maybe it is time to move along in that case.
Change. Doesnāt make everybody happy, never will.
I think of it that way because that what you said in this thread.
Another core contributor has stated in this thread that such discussions didnāt make any difference.
I never asked to be. Iāve actually not objected to this change. All Iāve been pointing out all along is that some of the ways things are done here are a bit ācloak and daggerā these days, and that it makes people a bit suspicious, and maybe if the senior devs were a little more open with the community those suspicions would be allayed.
I donāt hate it, I love it. I also have a responsibility to my family to ensure that the software I use to control my home is safe, so I ask a few questions about the motives of the devs from time to time.
8 Likes
Well, honestly, that is lovely to hear! Your general responses gave me an another impression. 
This is a fine example of the kind of clever response that frustrates me so much. It ignores all my points and comes across as more focused on āwinningā.
2 Likes
Iām sorry you feel that way @amelchio. It was not meant as being clever, Iām aware how it went and I am not trying to fight you in any way.
The ADR was open for discussion with our contributors, which includes you. However, at the same time, you now state your points are ignored?
Iām no saying you did wrong, nor did I say this is the best ADR flow ever. Paulus actually explains this topic in the latest Home Assistant podcast, for anyone who is interested.
So there are two issues here. One is the decision to phase out YAML. It seems like you think I am talking about that but I am not. I am personally okay with that. I also listened to the podcast now, Paulus only addresses this first issue.
As this thread is about the project structure, I am actually talking about the other issue: why was the decision made in a closed room and then dropped like a bomb?
Your response was that I was a part of the closed room so meh. That seemed clever but maybe it was just from mixing up the two issues.
1 Like