On 10/13/2016 12:35 PM, David Golden wrote:
Your various emails give the impression that – if the project were going
to continue under your unilateral control for a period of weeks or less
– you were planning to do a bit of final work in preparation for a
successor to carry out a "freeze" (bad word for it, I know, but I don't
By saying that you won't do this work because the community isn't
supporting your vision for the future of the project (or because you
feel your position was "vacated"), it's not clear whether that refusal
I already articulated the main obstacle in :
Given the long-established goals/priorities of this namespace, and mst's
*technical* track record, it is my immutable opinion that
DBIx::Class has no future as long as Matt Trout has any privileged (i.e.
not a mere user) influence on DBIC's governance and direction.
May I suggest that instead of trying to break down this clearly
articulated "event horizon" in the context of "interpersonal leadership
squabble", you reevaluate the presented evidence/claims in the light of
"does this in fact endanger the existing project userbase going forward?"
But to answer your question, I will repeat again: as an individual I
need more clarity on what is happening governance-wise before I can say
clearly and on record what and why I am doing after this "singularity".
That was not my intent and I apologize for making you feel that way. I
don't think you're obligated to deliver anything. I'm asking if there
is anything you feel you could deliver – which is an explicit
opportunity for you to say "no" and thus is not a demand.
You might want to consider re-calibrating what you are interpreting as
"pointy". When I say something like "It would be helpful if we could...
understand if there is still outstanding work you feel you could
deliver...", I think that is pretty far from being either pointy or
demanding. Phrases like "helpful", "understand" and "you feel you
could" are all signals that I'm trying to defer to your feelings about
A request made in the politest way possible, is still a demand when it
comes from "higher office". Graham articulated this way better than I
could in .
Searchable Archive: http://email@example.com