Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:29:50 -0400 Jose Gonzalez <[email protected]> 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. >
No, you don't have to go detailing anything to me... I simply asked you to be less ambiguous as to who this "we" referred to. Thanks for clarifying. > 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. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ Auto Insurance Quotes Enter Zip Code and Compare Rates! How Much Can You Save? http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/4bb56b0be4bc824aest01duc ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
