On Feb 4, 2011, at 5:51 PM, Chad Woolley wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Chad Woolley <thewoolley...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Ryan Davis <ryand-r...@zenspider.com> wrote: >>> Not yet. I'm not willing to have it pointing at the list until it is more >>> trustworthy. >> >> Please elaborate on what you think is untrustworthy. As well as >> perhaps some make some effort to answer my detailed requests for >> feedback which you have thusfar ignored. >> >> Hugs, >> -- Chad > > If you ignore this too, I'm going to start sending notifications to > the list again.
This is inappropriate, silence does not equate to success. > I've responded to everything promptly, and indicated where I'm > deferring things that I don't have time for right now. > > AFAIK it is stable, running all the requested interpreters, and I've > gone to extra effort to make it easy for any committer to turn off > emails for selected builds if they go awry, as well as selectively > opt-in to them. > > The committers on this project asked for CI, and I have provided it. > I don't have the time nor inclination to play whatever power trip > games you are playing with your selective communication. It is > immature, disrespectful, and uncalled for. If there's going to be this level of argument over the CI I don't think it's prudent to continue to use it. When I make releases I don't bother to consult it, instead I run `rake multi`. How many people have subscribed to the CI? Going back to the beginning of December myself, Ryan and Luis have been the top committers. If anything, our least-covered platform is Windows as Luis is our de-facto CI. Running CI on linux isn't going to help us much. _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
