It was handled badly. When Duane threw in the towel there should have been some discussion before you guys went ape with churn. Duane - thank you for your help. And to the other MC1322x guys - I'm sorry that I'm letting you down, but it's not a workable situation for us at the moment. Too much investment in the status quo, and frankly, too much swagger. The community made a decision, and on reflection I see that this is not a place where I can make useful progress with my limited time and resources.
Honestly, IAR+JLink works, and dealing with it's bugs and headaches is less effort for me. Let's move on guys- learn to live with your decisions (and I'll learn to live with mine). Jeff El Apr 21, 2009, a las 18:36 , Zach Welch escribió: > Hi all, > > Here are some of my thoughts about some of the issues raised today. > > Normally, I try to refrain from allowing myself to write this... > openly, > but recent events compel me to try and address the problems head on. > I tried to make the main points summarize my position, but nothing > herein was composed or edited before today. It's probably a bit > rough. > > 0) I seem to have this effect on open-source communities. Nuts. :( > 0a) I am truly sorry for any resulting noise or confusion, > particularly > that I am about to cause by any of the following items. > 0b) Brace yourself; it's not over. I could ride OpenOCD past v2.0... > 0c) ...unless I am driven off. It wouldn't be the first time. ;) > > 1) Post patches to the list or send them to me. I can deal with them. > 1a) Nothing will be lost, unless _you_ chose for it to be that way. > 1b) I have fixed bit-rotten 1.5MB+ patches. Nothing here scares me. > 1c) I do not need anyone with such outstanding work to 'svn up' first. > 1d) Otherwise, hang on for my next message; I'll give instructions. > > 2) I waited two weeks. Patiently. Where were these so-called > patches? > 2a) My patience ended at the end of last week, and I started patching. > 2b) I only ask for a measure of the same in return. I will help fix > it. > 2c) This is not criticism of others; I am simply stating The Way It > Was. > > 3) I broke my patches into parts that would be easy to review and > merge. > 3a) Subversion has merge functions par excellence. Learn to love > them. > 3b) That said, I know it can suck to repeatedly deal with the process. > 3c) Try keeping up with the Linux kernel. Seriously, this is nothing. > 3d) The solution to avoid this is simple: send in your patches first! > > 4) I will not apologize for fixing real problems with the code. > 4a) My changes seek to raise the standard of quality for the project. > 4b) I do beg for forgiveness over anything I actually broke (see 2b). > 4c) I have offered and stepped up to try to fix things that I break. > 4d) If anything got broken by my changes to date (and were not a > trivial > typo/lapse), the code was probably fragile and needed to be revisited. > > 5) I only move forward, never backward; read the specs, grok the code. > 5a) These changes _are_ moving things forward, if through discussion. > 5b) The J-Link driver will be fixed with this push, either by myself > or > others that are activity considering the now fresh and clean code. > 5c) I will help ensure that others' changes keep moving forward too. > 5d) I believe my reposting the FTD2XX high-speed patch attests to > that. > > 6) I will not endorse locking the repository, not even advisory. > 6a) That actually eliminates the pressure to push patches to the tree. > 6b) Locks make it virtually impossible to perform systematic tree-wide > maintenance without taking locks on every file (serializing the > group). > 6c) This policy kept me from contributing anything for almost two > weeks, > as I waited for others to finish their work and "unlock" the tree. > 6d) How would they be doled out? Round-robin? How many others will > not > bother to stick to waiting to see if they get a chance at the locks? > 6e) J-Link might be working by now, if the group had started accepting > my patches and made others with work-in-progress deal with the merges. > > 7) This is nothing personal; I know it's hard not to take it that way. > 7a) I am volunteering my time and services; I want this to be fun. > 7b) Please hang in there for a while longer; I'll try to make it good. > > 8) I have wasted man-months of my life dealing with these problems... > 8a) ...in each of the many different groups with which I try to work. > 8b) It somewhat appears to be my lot in life to do so. So it shall > be. > 8c) I try to win/lose these battles with my sharply written points... > 8d) ...even if they factor directly into why I find myself in word- > wars. > 8e) You'd almost think that I enjoy to write; I truly prefer to code. > > I hope that I have covered most of the points raised today, and I am > eager to now return my focus to more technical matters. Next, I will > send a revised list of tasks that I know are outstanding in the > project, > in the hope that it will further help us address this situation fully. > > Sincerely, > > Zach Welch > Corvallis, OR > > P.S. I have this sneaking sensation that this may be one of those > e-mails I live to regret, but I would regret not sending it even more. > > _______________________________________________ > Openocd-development mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development > _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
