On 03/01/21 23:23, rosea.grammostola wrote:
One can think, encouraging that someone who forked the project, sents
a kind message to this list and I always want to be a proponent of
restored relations, but still your message feels a bit misplaced here
Filipe. There is no denying.
I am sorry, that was not my intention.
I had no plans to reply unless to correct false information or personal
attacks.
That was the case though.
(I typically dislike mailing lists.)
The fact that NSM didn't hit Debian (still not in Debian afaik), had
nothing to do with the developer, it was because of NTK and waf. If
you guys wanted, it was possible to maintain a version of NSM without
NTK (Fltk only). I was helping Nils with it, at that moment, but
behind my and I guess our backs you guys where working on a fork. I
just became aware of it, when there arrived a message on the LAA
mailinglist, while having e-mail contact regularly the same week with
Nils.
Why would we contact you in specific?
You always been a protector of Jonathan in every level, even defending
his verbal abuse, so we thought it would be useless to involve you.
And it is not that correct that the only issue for Debian/Ubuntu is NTK.
Jonhathan's past behaviour violates Debian and Ubuntu CoC, so there is a
whole lot of friction from there too.
You guys didn't just forked, after telling that you would be forking
and discussing it. You did choose for a huge and hidden coup.
Also the fact that you guys call it the community version, still gives
me a very bad taste. It's plain newspeak to present a well thought out
'coup', behind the core community, as social.
It is a community version by the real definition of the word, since now
there is a community behind it rather than a single person.
It was ugly, but as I said in the other thread-chain, it was a last resort.
That developer who didn't want to implement NSM was Hermann from
Guitarix. I discussed NSM support for Guitarix for more then 7(!)
years with him. His argumentation was that NSM should be in Debian
first. Fair enough, but to name that as a reason for a fork...
That is the developer *you* know.
Was that all of them?
With having Argodejo as alternative GUI and a nsmd version which could
be used in Debian, you guys had plenty space to hack around. But you
did choose to fork also the FLTK original GUI.
The FLTK "legacy" GUI is my "fault".
I tried Argodejo, but personally do not like it that much. I am not its
target user, I feel.
So I plead to the group to keep the old GUI, that I would do the work
needed to make it run without NTK.
There were a few side-effects from going from NTK to FLTK, most of which
I submitted a patch for.
It is actually a nice thing in my view, because now we can use NSM
without depending on NTK, making compilation and packaging easier.
Thus, hopefully getting more users to go into NSM.
I can't conclude otherwise that your plan was to totally replace
Non-Session-Manager with New-Session-Manager. Given the meaning of
Non-Session-Manager for Linuxaudio and the contribution by it's
developer, this still feels completely wrong. Especially the way you
did it. So your message feels misplaced, sorry.
And indeed, this is huge downside of the LAU community lately. These
actions are cheered up by a small crowd who know each other well and
is backing up each other, even while they don't use NSM themselves.
Where the LAU community was a community of people with a scientific
background and/ or creative non-mainstream thinking, it's now a group
of witchhunters who call everyone with a different opinion a troll.
LAU and LAD are dying off, but not related to the topic at hand, I think.
We in these communities still hang out in IRC rooms and mailing lists.
This is arcane tech by new generations, who are used to stuff like Slack
and Discord.
So the people that remain, I expect to be closer to one another, because
we are now smaller than we used to be.
Even during 2020 LAC live-stream, IRC was an afterthought
Hail the community!
But sorry, as we use to say in this part of the world: weeds do not
die... Go male! :)
Future? I don't see how these two projects can come together really.
What the people of the fork could do, is to sent patches as much as
possible to the original project maybe. And / or maybe get rid of the
FLTK fork and focus on Argodejo only. Anyway, that's not my
expertise, nor did I create this situation, nor do I want to waste my
time on it.
