Ah, enough said then. Well if getting into Debian means letting them do to me what they did to Linus, then put away the scalpel, boys, Debian's not for me.
On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 5:34 PM Filipe Coelho <[email protected]> wrote: > Harassment is not allowed. > > And what was going on was on the border of it. > > I can send you some quotes if really needed, but that would be off-list. > On 04/01/21 01:29, Marc Lavallée wrote: > > I just read the Debian Code of Conduct. There's nothing there that would > forbid Non-Session-Manager to be included in Debian (maybe I don't > understand it). Besides, the packager does not have the be the author or > maintainer of the software. > > Marc > Le 21-01-03 à 20 h 03, Filipe Coelho a écrit : > > Language used by Jonathan when talking to other developers in the github > issue tracker and additionally in private conversations. > > There was a whole issue that got deleted by Jonathan after an ugly rant > from him against everyone else in there. > That was the one of the worst ones I have ever seen in my life. Glad that > it is gone now. For the best. > > > On 04/01/21 00:56, Marc Lavallée wrote: > > Filipe, can you be more specific about a Code of Conduct issue (that > seemed to have excluded Non to be included in Debian)? What's "clear"? The > use of WAF? Did the elusive "leader" wrote something? > > Marc > Le 21-01-03 à 19 h 41, Filipe Coelho a écrit : > > Debian and Ubuntu were made aware of what was going on in the github > tickets. > > I do not want to name any names, but someone from a leader role read some > discussions and said it was a clear violation of their CoC and that it made > a real problem for packaging. > > Hope that clears it. > > > On 04/01/21 00:37, J. Liles wrote: > > Regarding Debian: I don't recall ever having dealt with a Debian packager. > I believe Non is already in the distros of every packager who ever > contacted me. Debian is not among them. So anyone who says that I somehow > personally pissed off the Debian packagers is either lying or talking about > some behind the scenes deal I wasn't party to. I don't know the first thing > about what it really takes to get packaged in Debian, so if someone wants > to offer some help and advice there, that would be great. I know a lot of > users would prefer to just apt-get install than to have to build something > from source. > > Grammoboy did contact the Debian packagers, I believe and asked me some > questions to relay the answers to them, but I never dealt with them > directly. This was around the time of the fork when Grammoboy was trying > very hard to advocate for NSM support everywhere (which I appreciate). > > I don't really know what the problem is with Debian, but since there's so > much misinformation going around, I have to assume it has something to do > with that. The last thing Grammoboy relayed to me was that my use of WAF > was the problem, but all of Drobilla's stuff is in Debian and it uses WAF > so that seems like a pretext to me. Maybe someone who's an expert in Debian > policy knows. > > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 4:05 PM Filipe Coelho <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >>
