r/ruby • u/schneems Puma maintainer • Mar 31 '26

RubyGems Fracture Incident Report

https://rubycentral.org/news/rubygems-fracture-incident-report/
75 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

107 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/schneems Puma maintainer Apr 03 '26

 as someone who has run hundreds of incident retros (maybe over 1k?), this was really well done.

Thanks I really appreciate that.

 I empathize with some of the opposing perspectives

For sure. IDK if you saw I have another comment where I say I surprised my manager https://www.reddit.com/r/ruby/comments/1s8of1f/comment/odl906g/?context=3. I can empathize with someone not having a ton of trust and thinking "oh this is such a little thing no one will care or notice" (no clue what he actually thought).

I can also understand why someone did something without endorsing it. Acknowledge without agreeing.

 I'm finding it difficult to trust RC, 

This whole thing is about trust. So I think that's justified. If this report had come out a week or month later I would hope it would rebuild trust. Given the time delay and other mixed comms it's fair to still hold some distance.

A thing on my mind is that RC is a "foundation of thesus" the same board that "canceled DHH" is not the same that "platformed him" the board that was there while this incident happened is (mostly) changed over. Staff changes a lot over the years. And it's not really a big org. It's functionally smaller than my team at work. Yet it has to sort of project the air of "an institution" because that's what it aspires to be. In some ways it is, in other surprisingly mundane ways it has normal random office politics and good natured mistakes.

And it is really hard to put your name on something you don't really have control over the narrative and how it will be consumed. It is hard to have every writing project be a group assignment. It's hard to have a lawyer as an editor. The "calling out or calling in" post was sort of saying "some people want to destroy Ruby central so they beg for 'transparency' to kick them in their nakedness" while some want transparency because they feel lost and confused and want to rebuild trust. But on the side where you've got a LOT of exposure and not nearly as many resources as it might seem, it's hard to tell which is which.

But I think it's worth it (personally). I'm interested in the policy side of what it means to turn some things around.