On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:33:55 -0400 Michael Jennings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> On Wednesday, 12 October 2005, at 01:10:14 (+0900), > Carsten Haitzler wrote: > > > i dont see anything working against - its in parallel and its in a > > prototype dir. is he commiting bad code to ewl to make it worse? how > > is it working against? > > Have you not noticed the frustration and anger it has caused? THAT is > how it's working against the team. only from those not directly concerned witht he issues. nathat said early on - he doesnt care EXCEPt that he didnt get any chance to discuss the issues earlier on because of lack of communication from simon's end. i dont see anger and frustration. i see mild disappointment. > > so is enterminus - has it mvoed from there in months? no. it's > > stayed. nice toy. that's it. > > The intent is different. > > > how is it GOING BEHIND BACKS? its in the open. its in cvs. > > You're talking about NOW. I'm talking about BEFORE. Even Simon > himself admits he kept it a secret. Putting what is essentially an > EWL replacement into CVS without so much as a courtesy e-mail to > Nathan is going behind people's backs. You may not agree with me, but > I bet Nathan does, and I know others do too. > > > rtheres a disagreement - between mimicking gtk's api to make it easy > > to port or learn, or doing something different. how do YOU propose > > to have both teams work on the same code? really? > > Wrap EWL in a Gtk-like set of API calls. Is it possible? Is it > practical? I have no idea. That's why we DISCUSS things as a GROUP, > not go around making unilateral decisions that affect the project as a > whole. > > > what? i have not been supporting anyone? i am trying to bloody well > > calm the flamefest. but people keep trying to stoke up the fires. > > You've been defending their actions. Your comments have "scolded" > those in the EWL camp for what you perceive as their wrongdoings, but > not once have you confronted the ETK people for what they've done. > Sorry, that's taking sides. i have scoled those basically wanting to veto someones code. in a separate tree. in a prototype sandpit. it's like defending freedom of speech, but within the project. freedom of code. if someoen wants to break an existing tree - then that is a problem. if they build another one that is separate they have done no damage. any damage is self-inflicted by the people complaining by liking to think there is a conspiracy. > > he did just that - he asked me - i went "put it in proto - see what > > peolpe think". > > That's fine, but that's not all he should've done. Common courtesy > would dictate at MINIMUM dropping Nathan a note. > > > man. you guys are seeing reds under every bed. calm down. man i SAID > > to put it into proto. > > That should've been communicated to others. it was - cvs commit logs. there are automated systems in place. > > i am not going to make email announcments every time someoen wants > > to commit a tree of working code. > > You don't have to. But Simon should've, at least to Nathan. > > > cvs commits does it for me and i'm alreayd spending too much time on > > this flamefest. > > Then stop trying to get in the middle. because it's turing into a "we want to kick simon an hisham out because we dont like a piece of code that competes with older code". i have kept out of it until it turned into that. thus i defend because as i said - its turning into a lynching. > People have valid concerns that should be addressed. There are > questions to which Nathan and Dan deserve answers that only Simon and > Hisham can give. > > I respect that you're trying to play peacemaker, but in doing so, > you're only making the rift worse and preventing communication. and in continuing this flamewar you are only worsening it. i want there to be peace and quiety - if there is a lynching of a flamewar - or both you have snowballs chance of there ever being any discussion. > This all boils down to that: COMMUNICATION. If everyone, yourself > and myself included, would put a higher priority on communications, > this type of thing would be far less frequent. i'd love to see that - but maybe some PATIENCE would help? i know i have a 4 week backlog on email i have marked for reply - and it grows. 4 weeks is pretty good for me. for example. > > i have yeard very little badmouthing. i have heard opinions > > expressed - which were not vociferous or undermining. > > And you're not around much of the time. Just because you don't see it > doesn't mean it's not happening. i will accept that - if its happened - i havent seen it. and as i said - i have already looked into that issue. > > god damn. i give up. i WROTE SPECIFICALLY that i DO VALUe THE > > WORK. i give up at this point. you all will believe whatever it is > > you want to believe and read whatever you want to read into it. my > > attempts to calm things and keep neutral and stop whats becoming a > > lynching are pointless. i am leaning to their side because THEY are > > being attacked. not because i am condoning anything. you are using > > awfully strong words for something you dont even know all the facts > > of. > > If I don't know all the facts, then enlighten me. I'm talking about > communication and cooperation. Not knowing all the facts is merely a > symptom of the very problem I'm referring to here! There should've > been better communication. i'm doubting communication is working with you - even if i put it in plain black and white that i do value - highly - the work on ewl, you turn around and say i don't. (read back through the thread). thats a point at which i give up. > As for valuing their work, I know you do. And you've said as much. I > was saying that the way the situation was handled could be interpreted > in the opposite way. then why is it i went to lengths to clarify that it is not intended as such and not meant to be such and i specifically wanted to stop this lines of reasonsing before it began. but you want to keep going down that line anyway. this is what i wanted to stop. i want there to be calm on the western front. > > reds under the bed. i repeat. there was no "secrecy" > > Simon himself admitted there was: > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=enlightenment-devel&m=112875966103118&w=2 i would take that usage of english with a grain of salt - and replace with "quiet". i have some reasonable experience transliterating english to english used by foreigners. hell - english isn't even my native tongue. > > simon came to me personally saying that he and nathan disagree on > > fundamental ewl issues > > Ah, there's the rub. Did he say WHAT issues they disagree on? > Because as far as I can tell, no actual issues have been discussed. > > ************** > If nobody gets anything else from this entire conversation, get this: > If there are issues, disagreements, dislikes, or any other conflicts > regarding EWL, for fuck's sake, SAY SOMETHING! That's really the > bottom line here. If there's a disagreement, then let's disagree! So > far that I've seen, no one has actually pointed out any disagreements > at all. > ************** even in the mail link - you have communication there. from simon's end he believes things didnt move with ewl to improve, nathan believes simon wasnt communicating back - there is a breakdown in communication, but that's not a reason to go lynch. > > and hes' going to try something - in my quick positiveness i said > > "sure - try". > > That's fine. Personally, I'd have asked what the disagreements were > first, but that's not to say I'm faulting you for not doing so. i did - it was the "i dont think i can do this with ewl's design and that means i want to change large parts and nathan doesnt think we need to". it was already a disagreement. maybe they coudl have spent longer in "talks". i don't know. it could have been an idea - i'll give that to you for sure, but seemingly it isnt working and well - more code is more code. yes it's lgpl - and i know as long as it remains as such i'd use etk as nothing more than an incentive system and a "hey cool - it works" and as a learning device for simon and anyone else working on it. > > 99.9% of the time anyone ever says they will do aytning they never > > come trhough with the goods. i am taking his word at ti that they > > disagree. i also saw that ont he mailing lists - simon did start up > > some conversation. i am not going to dig it out right now. anyway - > > he actual - UNLIKe 99.9% of people, DID SOMETHING - WOW! and > > crap. it actually worked. would you believe it. so he asked if he > > can put it in - i said to put it in proto and see what peolpe > > think. i didn thear from him for a long time beyond him asking edje > > and evas questions and bringing up some issues that he even gave me > > pathes for to improve edje and evas. > > I assume you're talking about this e-mail from July 14th: > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=enlightenment-devel&m=112137986609349&w=2 > > Not one of those issues is a design issue. They're all behavior > requests, and all can easily be rectified (I would think). simon said he sent patches but didnt see them committed. its a breakdown of communication here. > I will grant you that no one replied to his e-mail, and someone > should've. But creating an entirely new widget set instead of > correcting behavior in the existing one defies logic. You wonder why > we suspect that there's more going on here than meets the eye? That's > why. well to calm your fears - there isnt. its 2 people who disagree and dont see eye to eye on a topic that is important to them. :( > > man - peolpe do that anyway. i've grown a thick skin. as for > > trashing - i have yet to see this trashing - i have seen comments > > that basically say "i dont like ewl's overall design, look and feel, > > and i think the api could be different/better" thats a rough summary > > - i have not seen any rude or vociferous language used or any of > > this supposed bashing. maybe i have become too cynical, jaded and > > thick skinned to notice it and what i take as merely comments you > > take as bashing. > > Those comments are meaningless, though. Not one of them is a concrete > example. It's like saying "I don't like Carsten." That could mean > anything from "Carsten smells funny" to "Carsten's mom ate my last > doughnut!" ok - fine - soemoen doesnt like me. i am not going to waste my time agonising over why. :) > Nathan has asked and asked and asked for concrete examples of flaws in > the design and/or API. As far as I know, he has yet to receive a > single one. If I'm wrong in that, please point me to the location. no he hasn't (recieved any really detailed answer) but then again simon has been fairly quiet on the subject. but as simon said - he sent patches, they didnt go in, there was some breakdown and he decided to fix his own problems his own way instead of argue about them i guess. > > 1. there is no conspiracy - it wasnt snuck in. it wasnt done behind > > backs. if they wanted to do so they could have set up a closed > > private cvs on sf.net and done it away from anyones sight. > > Which, ironically, probably would've been better. :-) :) > > 3. as for negative discussions of ewl i have asked that any ewl > > discussions happen with authors present already. > > I would also ask that they be constructive and offer concrete > criticisms, not just wide-open airy statements like "I dislike the > API." i'd agree and disagree - if they dislike it - fine. thats a valid opinion of an api, but examples of what is disliked and how it can be improved (X vs Y) would be good. > > 4. can't we all just get along. this flamefest is not doing anyone > > any good. > > If it gets the ETK folks to start talking more and pointing out flaws > in EWL, then it will. Or it will bring to light the fact that they > are either unable or unwilling to do so, and that, too, is a good > thing to know. > > > 5. pick up, move on. what do we hope to GAIN by continuing this? the > > only conclusions are "kick hisham and simon out of the e group" and > > frankly - there's way too much flakeyness to go kicking people out > > who are active and DOING things. > > I'm not advocating kicking anyone out. As far as I can tell, no one > has advocated that. What I *am* saying is that people need to work > more as a team. "Hardly. Another solution (and my favorite, by the way) is that ETK be removed from CVS. You can start your own project on SourceForge if..." > > 7. i repeat Nathan, Dan, Martin, Ben, etc. etc. have done VERY GOOD > > WORK. they should BE PROUD OF IT. > > Agreed. > > > 8. everyone now go to the bar, have a beer, play some pool, relax, > > chill... peace love and flowery things. > > You know I don't drink beer. :-P you do now! so open wide! :) ok - i'll allow you to have a long island ice tea instead :) > *** > > The way I see it, I'm not trying to have a "flamefest." I'm trying to > draw out, beat out, guilt out, etc. the truth. I want communication. > I want honesty. I want to focus on making the best code we can make > in the most efficient, most effective way possible. That means > working together toward a common goal. ok. very laudible goals. but lets not do it with beatings. :) lets chill actually let people talk. :) > Michael > > -- > Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > n + 1, Inc., http://www.nplus1.net/ Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > "Can we leave the world outside just for awhile, just for awhile? > Spend some time, you and I, under this bright, glorious sky? It's > been so long since I first saw you, but I still love the smile in > your eyes." -- Roxette, "Church of Your Heart" > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, > and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel > -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 裸好多 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tokyo, Japan (東京 日本) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
