On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:29:50 -0400 Jose Gonzalez <jose_...@juno.com> said:
> > >> No 'trolls' here man. People really should know *clearly* > >> who the gate-keepers are, who controls what, what the > >> project's aims and goals are, etc. > >> > > > > dude. by now, having founded and run this project for over 13 years... i > > think i have the right to not have to go explain myself to you, or this > > list, or ESPECIALLY anyone on the list of accounts to remove. you should > > know better. > > > > > As you say.. But it's not about who to remove if you want to or not, > (and of course they won't care), it's about saying clearly that it's you > not some ambiguous "we". for you information... this was discussed on irc amongst several people tho are core developers and long time contributors. just because you were not there doesn't mean i have to go detailing who i have talked to, who i am, who this "we is" etc. etc. i am not creating some government or corporate-level bureaucracy to details which committee had a meeting when and who attended, publish the minutes of that meeting and so on to keep you happy. you will have to trust the fact that this has been discussed as indicated and there was an agreement and that someone is TAKING ACTION. there's too much stuff in this world that ends up in endless discussion groups and never gets ACTED on. this project is about DOING things. why is that so? because *I* am about doing things. and the people who join this project are doing so because they ALSO want to DO things. if they want to just hang about and endlessly discuss - there are a lot of government think tanks and countless other online forums to go discuss things forever because having the meeting to discuss the discussion then to have the conference to propose the solutions to then discuss them in further meetings and so on and never DO anything. i'm DOING something. i have put this up in the wider forum after the small discussion with a few other people and offering a way to get off the nuke list. i someone thinks that removing access is a woeful sin and i should be punished and beaten for even considering it - how dare i do that nd ask people for their opinions, then... let them come forth and say so. suffice to say there is a FACT - accounts are dormant or have never been used for a long period of time. i noticed them when using the e dev "database" for finding people, and in the process i spotted quite a few who have had accounts added long ago and never committed a single thing. they have no business needing svn access. i also checked last login times on the servers, and did a more extensive hunt through ALL developers there and came up with this list. i mentioned that i found this to several other developers on irc - and they all agreed there needs to be a clean. this is that clean. be happy i didn't just unceremoniously nuke the accounts with no notice. it's tempting to do so to get this off my todo list. i am being nice and friendly, offering an opportunity for those people to say "oh hey! oh! i need it because of X and i haven't used it because of Y" and i'll happily remove them from the "nuke" list if those reasons seem acceptable. > >> Of course most of the people in that list won't care if > >> you remove their svn access. But some there were basically > >> the core e-developers for many years.. and many of those > >> no longer contribute because of issues with the way the project > >> is 'run'. > >> > >> Don't you see that there's a recurring problem here? > >> Do you want that to repeat itself yet again, or do you want > >> to be able to keep core developers? > >> > > > > name them and get a quote from them that's why they left. i challenge you. > > you are the only one who keeps saying this. even if they have beeen > > developers for many years - they dont USE their accounts. there is NO > > REASON to keep them. we advertise out developers on our website. it's > > generated from our svn access list. if these people are not doing anything > > they get removed. if they are unreasonable they will get upset - and then > > there is all the more reason to be happy they stopped doing anything. if > > they are reasonable they are happy to have the account removed and if they > > ever want one again, they can ask. it means we get to at least have a more > > accurate face of "who is doing what". > > > > > I'll leave the issue alone since it appears that no one else here > sees any problems. > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > Get Free Email with Video Mail & Video Chat! > http://www.juno.com/freeemail?refcd=JUTAGOUT1FREM0210 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > 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) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
