So it be. Andy, my apologies for trying to support the adoption of a CoC, either the one proposed by Jeff or that of W3C as I proposed. Evidently the idea of being an organized community doesn't appeal to LinuxCNC users. I don't understand why there is so much opposition, after all it is assumed that an organized community is able to work better and with more personal satisfaction for all the participants, and instead in this case a terrible conflict has broken out.
Regards On Tue, 2021-06-29 at 23:01 +0100, andy pugh wrote: > There seems to be a serious misunderstanding developing here about > how > LinuxCNC is organised. > > It isn't. > > Really not at all. > > All LinuxCNC has is a web page, a github, a buildbot, a code-base and > a bunch of contributors. > > Some contributors have admin rights on the web server, and some have > push rights on the github. (I have both of these things) But that > doesn't make me part of "The management" or mean that I have some > agenda. > And the same is true of Jeff. He is a supremely valuable contributor > to the LinuxCNC code-base (I think that he has written more lines of > code than almost any other contributor[1]) but I very much doubt > that > he has any particular political agenda to push. > (If I had to guess, and it would be a guess, because we haven't > discussed it, it would be that Jeff is worried about trouble looming > if we don't have a CoC). > > Don't go imagining that there are Machiavellian intrigues going on in > back-channels. We are not that organised. > > Nobody is in charge, there is no committee, there is no board of > directors. Things only get done if one person decides that something > should be done, and then does it. > > [1] > https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/graphs/contributors?from=2003-10-05&to=2021-06-29&type=a > _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
