On 10/06/2015 06:21 PM, Piotr Ożarowski wrote:
>> I probably have more Python modules in my QA page than all the persons
>> involved in this thread... *combined*! No, it's not a competition, and
> it's about quantity and not about quality then? I prefer to have more
> maintainers with few packages only rather than having those with over 50
> (yes, I think I maintain too many packages)

There we go again, gratuitous accusation with no facts behind.

I do believe I'm doing a good job at maintaining what I maintain. Bugs
are addressed in due time (though I have a backlog right now to
address). The numbers talk for themselves:


>> in fact, I would have loved to share this workload with the team,
>> because I have too many. But now I can't anymore. This is in fact what
> share is fine, force us to use your workflow/tools/goals and timeline is not

As would say my mother, better read this than being dead... Never the
less, it's still a very surprising read, that pushes me to remind you
the facts over these last 2 years.

You forced everyone to keep using SVN even after a vote for Git, and
after others went away because of this. You even refused to have the
team as "Maintainer:" and a Git repository elsewhere, like in
collab-maint (you even complained about this very recently).

Now, on my side, would you mind reminding everyone when I've forced
anyone to use a particular workflow? Or are you referring to the git
workflow I'm using within PKG OpenStack? Let's say that's what you are
referring to, then: I'm the one working on these, and (up to very
recently) doing it all alone, so why is this a problem to use the
workflow I found the most efficient?

This was for the workflow, it probably also includes tooling.

Now, if you don't want to share goals and timelines with others, in
order to have the Debian archive as a whole, working well, with
transitions correctly done, then I don't know what to say. I thought it
was commonly accepted in Debian.

>> Are you seriously considering that I try to get closer with Piotr, and
>> suffer from even more patronizing? For both our mental health, that's a
>> very bad idea.
> sorry to hear that, but it doesn't supprise me to be honest as you don't
> want to work with me even in package we both co-maintain

Would you mind telling what you are referring to?

Reply via email to