This back and forth was brought to mind when looking at a recent paper, which
said in the abstract:
Our results show that the level of politeness in the communication
process among developers does have an e ect on the time required to x issues
and, in the majority of the analysed projects, it has a positive correlation
with attractiveness of the project to both active and potential developers.
The more polite developers were, the less time it took to x an
issue, and, in the majority of the analysed cases, the more the
developers wanted to be part of project, the more they were willing to continue
working on the project over time.
"Would you mind fixing this issue? An Empirical Analysis of Politeness and
Attractiveness in Software Developed Using Agile Boards”
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/271384912_Would_you_mind_fixing_this_issue_An_Empirical_Analysis_of_Politeness_and_Attractiveness_in_Software_Developed_Using_Agile_Boards
<http://www.researchgate.net/publication/271384912_Would_you_mind_fixing_this_issue_An_Empirical_Analysis_of_Politeness_and_Attractiveness_in_Software_Developed_Using_Agile_Boards>
— d
> On Sep 2, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Zdenek Styblik <zdenek.styb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Jordan Hargrave
> <jordan_hargr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Ah well that makes things much easier! Would something like ipmitool pef
>>>> policy and ipmitool pef policy be OK?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You mean to tell me the whole code review was for nothing? That you've
>>> deliberately wasted my time? And now you're asking me to do yet
>>> another code review? Well, good luck with that!
>>>
>>> Z.
>>
>> Don't be an ass.
>>
>
> You call me an ass?!
>
>> This is the original patch that I posted in 2013 and have been trying to get
>> upstream so that we can implement additional features. Several weeks of my
>> time was was wasted developing that PEF rework patch due to your unclear
>> instructions.
>
> Yep, I've rejected it before and guess what, I'll do that again. Get
> it in line with the rest of the code in ipmitool and/or in that
> particular C file and try your luck again. If you want to throw away
> "several weeks of wasted time" due to my "unclear instructions"
> instead of contributing and helping others; hey, that's fine by me.
> Your call. And btw didn't you get paid for that wasted time?
> But there is no way in hell the patch you've posted in that particular
> form is going to make it in!
>
> Have a good day, Sir!
> Z.
>
>>
>> --jordan hargrave
>> Sr. Software Engineer
>> Dell Enterprise Linux Engineering
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
> Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
> in one place.
> SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
> _______________________________________________
> Ipmitool-devel mailing list
> Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog!
Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools
in one place.
SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Ipmitool-devel mailing list
Ipmitool-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ipmitool-devel
