Harmeet,
I think that you just have a very hard time not pointing fingers. With
little else, your entire note is just a litany of finger pointing. If you
could just get your head around the idea that the only responsible party is
James (in other words, US as a GROUP), then you'd see that there is no one
to point fingers at. Ego-less programming. If a change breaks something,
the change is broken, NOT THE CHANGER.
You persist in referring to the "(ir)responsible developer" when we all know
whom you mean. Do you really think that your faux anonymity profits
anything? We should also remember that the person in question undertook the
task of working on the NNTP handler because it was perceived to be broken,
no one had worked on it for many months, and others were suggesting that it
be moved out of the mainstream until there were people willing to fix it.
If there were some minor regressions (even if they have significant impact),
that isn't a cause for a personal attack. That same person was one of the
more significant contributors to the v2.1 changes, and previously planning
to contribute significantly to v3.
I suspect that you believe it, but I do find it ironic that you believe that
all of the interpersonal issues relate to another developer. Actually, I
think that the current friction is related to the code freeze, and that the
sooner we ship v2.1, the sooner people will feel better.
My own view is that the "particular developer" whom you malign has a limited
tolerence for what he sees as clearly wrong, but that he does attempt to
work with others, explains his views in technical detail, has been very
committed to the James project, has an entirely appropriate vision for where
James should go, and is frustrated by a justified perception that there has
been little effort other than his own to do the necessary chores related to
the Release Build.
I do believe that we can make structural changes to our release process to
streamline things, and prevent code freeze on the entire code base, but as
Danny and Serge often point out, this IS a small project, and the idea of
the code freeze was partially to promote more cooperation on the release
chores. Perhaps that was an unwise approach in an Open Source project, even
if commercially proper.
> Do your best and assume others are doing their best too.
Please re-read your own words, and take them to heart. You are NOT applying
that in this case, now are you? You cannot read this thread and claim that
you are honoring and respecting the "(ir)responsible developer."
> This lack of responsibility and bickering sucks energy and must cease.
Then I shall not expect a reply to this message, other than a detailed
analysis of what precisely you feel is wrong with the wire level protocol
handling.
I will reply to your other points in a separate message, since I suspect
that some people will want to skip reading this message, and I want to
address the technical matters.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
