Hi,
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 20:55 +0000, Alex wrote:
Do you really think it is *my* job to "fix the problem"? I am just a
Yes, I do.
simple user who had simply a simple question while you are the "Design
lead". Additionally it would be more than just "a few minutes", because
Is putting something like "design lead" in quotes supposed to make it
derogatory or something?
So I have read it on catalyst's project page ;]
I can't speak python.
Great. All the functionality which you've asked about is implemented
solely in bash, as most of catalyst is bash.
Now I see, you are right. I've just stopped reading after I have seen
the "catalyst" file in the top directory.
Doing catalyst support for non-releases takes a significant enough
portion of my time that I sometimes wish we'd never bothered to make an
ebuild for it. ;]
Why do you bother the time if it is too much for you? I don't understand
that.
Good point. Perhaps I should refrain from posting any more updates to
catalyst for public consumption.
I've thought if I have a question I can mail to this list and get some
help from _users_. I didn't excepted that there's a very nice "Design
lead" who answers with something like "what makes you think the CD
*would* login automatically?", only if I had asked.
I'm really having a hard time following what you're saying here.
Me too.
The only thing that I *do* understand is that somebody needs to get
their panties out of their crack. Did you miss the smiley at the end of
that question that you have decided to quote ad nauseum? Yeah, that
means it was a *joke* to be taken lightly.
Ok, nice to know. I haven't interpreted it as joke. But that was not the
point on which I got pissed off.
In the out-of-date template specfile there was some sentences I've read.
And what makes you think the users *know* that the templates are
out-of-date?
Did you even read what I said?
Yes I have.
I said that the templates were *correct* and the code was wrong. How
did you know it was wrong? Well, you reported originally that it didn't
work as expected, so you *obviously* knew that it was wrong. Are you
saying that you were able to assert that it didn't work, but at the same
time didn't know that something was wrong?
I never had said something would be wrong. I've just excepted help.
Sorry if the topic was misleading.
You had begin to argue, while it was just, not more, not less an answer
to the "what makes you think the CD *would* login automatically?" Why
should I bother time if I had only a question? It also would reduce the
flexibility if I implement such a function. That was your argument.
That wasn't my "argument" at all. First off, I wasn't arguing anything,
I was making a statement. How you decided that this was some sort of
"argument" to be had, I really don't know.
You asked why it didn't auto-login, and I answered with a simple set of
I've never asked why it didn't auto-login. I have only written that it
does not auto-login, because I had excepted it.
statements of why. I thought it would be funny to start off with a joke
beforehand, which you blew totally out of proportion and then decided to
start responding with some sort of thinly-veiled "insult" by calling me
a "design lead" or something.
This shouldn't be an "insult" or something. It was just because you
excepted *me* to fix this, altough it wasn't a bug (I think). I got
irritated. such easy
I really don't know what you're trying to accomplish here.
Nothing. Actually. I just get pissed off by your _last_ mail (not this,
I am answering now, but this before)
I was merely trying to point out why catalyst does what it does. I had
no desire to get into some sort of pissing match with someone who is way
too sensitive. Go back and re-read my emails. I am not trying to
insult you. I am trying to *help* you answer your questions.
Seriously. You need to just calm the hell down. I'm not *after* you or
anything. I'm simply trying to explain to you why things are they way
that they are.
Yes, but between your lines I've found a begin of an argue, but may an
interpretation failure. I just don't understand your last mail.
Also, you'll notice that the broken behavior that you experienced in
catalyst has been changed in 2.0_rc50. Do you know *why* it was
changed? Because you had found a bug, and I fixed it. It really is
*that* simple.
You said the code was wrong. does it mean it does now auto-login? (or is
it an interpretation failure again?)
Maybe I should ignore such mails from you, if I except help from
_users_. Maybe I should also ignore all the mails from you assigned to
me for this thread. I don't know yet, but I'll see and you'll see.
Honestly, be my guest. In fact, I implore you to do so.
Ok, nice that we could clarified this.
I've to do better things than argue with you, and I hope you too.
How about stepping back and taking a nice breather? It's just software,
man. No need to get all pissy about it.
It seems to was (can I say this so (with the grammar I mean)) just some
interpretation-failures on both sides. sorry
bye.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
