Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Dňa Sat, 3 Mar 2007 20:46:35 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] napísal: On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it a developer-only privilege? You just made that up. To co-lead a Gentoo project? You need to be a dev to do that. I couldn't join any projects even as a member until I became a dev, and I created the distro. You are effectively co-leading (likely leading) PMS as a non-dev - worse than that, as someone who has been explicitly removed from a dev role. Daniel, could you please stop that? You're being ridiculous and just wasting everyone's time with this. The guy wants to do some work on PMS, let him do it - in my opinion he's one of the most qualified people to do it. Why does it matter whether or not he has write access to the portage tree CVS module (work on PMS doesn't require any commits there anyway) ? Don't start again about the dubious official status of Gentoo developership - since when is volunteer work about political (yes, political) status? Just. Drop. It. Regards, -- Andrej Kacian ticho at gentoo org Gentoo Linux developer - net-mail, antivirus, sound, x86 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 11:40:39AM -0800, Josh Saddler wrote: zOMG Cabal conspiracy!!1oneone! So, who'se conspiring against you now? Devrel? The Council? Oh...*Brian* this time. Or just anyone whom you've never liked or has disagreed with you about anything? Oh wait, I bet you think we're supposed to take your cries of conspiring and derailing *seriously*. Bottom line is you're not going to prevent him from having a say in the matter, anymore than someone could prevent you from having a say in PMS. Stop being so dramatic. OMG he only wants to attack me and my pet project! And here's reason foo that --uh, several others just poked holes in-- but oh well! That's all in *your* head. The rest of us note with mild bemusement that you've yet to provide any kind of backup for your wild he said she said tirades, though if you do want to show some evidence, kindly do so off-list. Keep your spewing on-topic: technical issues, not on your personal issues. Stop making useless comment. -- Alexander Færøy Bugday Lead Alpha/IA64/MIPS Architecture Teams User Relations, Quality Assurance pgpa8KXEK1rkT.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 20:46:35 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To co-lead a Gentoo project? You need to be a dev to do that. I couldn't join any projects even as a member until I became a dev, and I created the distro. You are effectively co-leading (likely leading) PMS as a non-dev - worse than that, as someone who has been explicitly removed from a dev role. He's not leading it. He's writing parts of it under my lead, despite the fact that he's probably better qualified technically than I am to lead it. Again, you're not just submitting a patch but architecting the strategic direction for package manager interoperability which has strategic implications for Gentoo, and is more than just a user-submitted contribution. Nope. He's documenting the existing situation for package manager interoperability. Wherever PMS goes against existing practise it's been discussed either on -dev or with the portage developers past and present. Again, he's not influencing future direction this way. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Daniel Robbins wrote: On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it a developer-only privilege? You just made that up. To co-lead a Gentoo project? You need to be a dev to do that. I couldn't join any projects even as a member until I became a dev, and I created the distro. You are effectively co-leading (likely leading) PMS as a non-dev - worse than that, as someone who has been explicitly removed from a dev role. And you know this because? Stick to the facts. Ciaran is not leading the project as the current project lead has already expressed someone in this thread. I have committed patches to PMS so I have some experience in the matter. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Daniel Robbins wrote: On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it a developer-only privilege? You just made that up. To co-lead a Gentoo project? You need to be a dev to do that. I couldn't join any projects even as a member until I became a dev, and I created the distro. You are effectively co-leading (likely leading) PMS as a non-dev - worse than that, as someone who has been explicitly removed from a dev role. The Gentoo Java project has many users contributing to it and I wouldn't have it any other way. I thought you wanted to work on something in the gentoo-x86 like amd64 keywording and as such would require CVS access? There is no point in joining the amd64 team unless you can actually commit keywords (of course arch testers but there is a process for that). Also by definition PMS is not an official Gentoo project as there is not a project or sub project page for it in http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: What do you think about removing gtk-1.2 theme engines from tree?
On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 10:21 +, Duncan wrote: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 03 Mar 2007 21:35:16 +0700: On 2/27/07, Andrej Kacian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because it's much more convenient to just go emerge theme instead of googling up the upstream website, finding the link to download, download it, unpack and figure out how to install. Me too. Should we create a theme overlay (officially) and move non-code themes there? Now that's IMO a very useful idea! =8^) I too find themes available in portage useful, but equally don't necessarily believe they belong in the main tree. An overlay seems to me to be the perfect solution. Additionally themes being in portage or an overlay (even just data packages) gives users the benefit of not having to check for updates from tons of different places for different themes. Just emerge --update world and all is taken care of. As far as gtk-1* itself is concerned, GNOME team does not want to maintain it - however several other developers have already stepped up (in past threads) to take over maintainership. Just need to formalize it with someone at some point in metadata.xml In other words - gtk1 is probably not going anywhere in the foreseeable future. -- Mart Raudsepp Gentoo Developer (wxwindows, gnome) Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 20:46:35 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it a developer-only privilege? You just made that up. To co-lead a Gentoo project? I'm not co-leading it. You keep making things up. Stop doing that. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 08:46:35PM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: [snip] Would you be kind enough to stop hijacking the thread ? You are responsible for this last flame... just quit it please. - ferdy -- Fernando J. Pereda Garcimartín Gentoo Developer (Alpha,net-mail,mutt,git) 20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4 pgpSAwjNUZqqe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] guile-1.8 stabilization because of gnucash security bug
On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 14:27 +0100, Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
See tracker bug (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163921).
guile-1.8 may go stable soon because of a security bug in gnucash (bug
167706).
I think all blocking bugs which are still open, can be fixed by either adding
use flag detection or depending on guile-1.6* as appropriate.
guile 1.6 and 1.8 are in the same SLOT still. I don't see how anyone
could depend on guile-1.6* - that's usable for when it's a separate SLOT
and not causing upgrade-downgrade cycles for users.
In line of this mail I articulated further my concerns about this kind
of DEP, and the existence of deprecated and discouraged USE flags in the
first place on http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=163908 - the
relevant guile related bug against gnome
The following
code can be used to check use flags:
if has_version =guile-1.8*; then
local flags=deprecated regex
built_with_use dev-scheme/guile ${flags} || die guile must be
built with \${flags}\ use flags
fi
Please fix your bugs :)
--
Mart Raudsepp
Gentoo Developer
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 13:17:56 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, again, since you are participating as a key member in an official Gentoo project, which is a developer-only privilege, you should either have your dev access reinstated or be removed from the project. This is incorrect. The full implication here is that only devs can contribute significantly to Gentoo - which would be a big backwards step, and something we have gone through a fair amount of heart-ache to avoid. We have evolved various ways in which users can contribute valuable work; not just by posting into bugzilla (which was the only mechanism available when I joined, shortly after you left I think) but also working alongside proxy devs, or working in with devs in overlays, working as Arch Testers and so on. Personally I work with several people who are not Gentoo devs, but are _critically_ important to the work that I do for Gentoo. After all, although we call ourselves developers, really we're integrators. Today, being a dev (which essentially means having commit access to Gentoo repositories) is mostly about taking responsibility for what is finally committed. -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Today, being a dev (which essentially means having commit access to Gentoo repositories) is mostly about taking responsibility for what is finally committed. FWIW, FreeBSD has a long and glorious history of proxy-maintainership in their ports tree -- that model seems to work pretty well for them. Thanks, Marty -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: Copyright, non-US devs and Gentoo Foundation vs Gentoo (Was: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting)
I note that FSF-Europe uses what it calls a Fiduciary Licence Agreement to gain the ability to prosecute license violations for software whose copyright is distributed amongst many owners. Discussion here: http://www.fsf-europe.org/projects/fla/fla.html and the boilerplate for FTF's agreement in PDF here: http://www.fsf-europe.org/projects/fla/FLA.en.pdf This may be more appropriate than a straight copyright assingment as used by FSF (US). I guess this is an issue for the trustees, rather than the council, but (b)cc'ed both for comment. -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Grepping for some automagic deps in ebuilds
I was bored yesterday, so i have updated and re-run an old script i had
which tries to find ebuilds doing things like that:
DEPEND=foo? ( cat-bar/libfoo )
src_compile() {
econf || die
emake || die
}
The problem here is that, if libfoo is installed, it will be linked to
even when USE=-foo, because the foo flag is not used to affect the
package configuration (no $(use_enable foo) or alike).
The heuristic behind my script is that when a USE flag is used in DEPEND
but is nowhere used in the ebuild code, there is something wrong. Sure,
this doesn't apply to RDEPEND, where optionnal runtime deps are very
welcome, and do not necessarily affect building of the package.
A run on yesterday's Portage tree has found 2027 occurences [1], in 1065
ebuilds [2] of 454 different packages [3]. Among the affected ebuilds,
367 were the best visible version of a package on ~x86 [4]. I've
thought some people might be interested by this results, hence this
email.
From this lists, i had 73 packages installed [5], that i have reviewed
[6] to see whether this results were complete crap or not. This analysis
indicates that the heuristic is not bad, and that implementation is not
as broken as i would have expected. Among the suspect conditionnal
DEPEND of this packages:
* 23 were actual automagic deps (what i was initialy after):
- 5 could be fixed by using some existing ./configure options
- 13 would need some autoconf patching (adding AC_ARG_ENABLE, etc.)
- 5 would need patching some other build system (not autotools)
* 40 were deps that should actually have been in RDEPEND only:
- 9 that are selinux policies
- 4 that are some extra gst-plugins
- 3 that are other dlopened or alike stuffs (which do not affect
the build time as far as i could see)
- 11 that are executables for the runtime (like CD-R writing or FS
formatting tools)
- 6 that are interpreted languages modules (that were not checked
or used at build-time sure)
- 7 that are data files (doc, fonts, etc.)
* 9 were useless deps (remainings of some older versions, doc-building
tools that are never called, etc.)
* 4 were false-positives:
- in lirc, because the script doesn't understand $LIRC_DEVICES
- in quake3, because the script missed the buildit() wrapper
around use()
- in pure-ftpd, because the script missed the enable_extension*()
from confutils.eclass
- in portage, because there is some !build? ( ... ) deps
That's the only case i've found where the heuristic is at fault
on something legitimate. The 3 other false-positives are just
implementation issues of the script.
Now, the disclaimers:
- I am sure my review of the 73 ebuilds i had installed do contains
some mistakes. It was just a first pass to get a raw idea on the
heuristic itself and the amount of false-positives. Don't worry, i will
not go open 73 bug reports. Actually, i will only open some bug reports
for cases i find important (in particular, that doesn't include the 40
should be RDEPEND), as i find time to write the patches.
- If you look at the script [7,8], you will be horrified by how dumb
it is. Yes, it will both miss lots of true-positives, and report some
false-positive. It's not a static analyser for bash, but rather a stupid
piece of grepping which happens to point a fair number of ebuild issues.
[1]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/20070303/full-log.txt
[2]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/20070303/catpkgver-flags.txt
[3]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/20070303/catpkg.txt
[4]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/20070303/best_visible-full.txt
[5]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/20070303/installed-flags.txt
[6]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/20070303/installed-ebuilds-analysis.txt
[7]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/check_flags.sh
[8]http://tdegreni.free.fr/gentoo/check_DEPEND_flags_usage/check_flags_with_logs.sh
--
TGL.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
In defense of my confusion, certainly appears from the perspective of the gentoo-dev ml that you are leading at the very least the day-to-day management of the project. But if I am wrong, I *sincerely* apologize. Let me see if I have all the facts right. Summary Of PMS: PMS is a project that is not an offical Gentoo project, but is controlled by a Gentoo developer (spb), is hosted on external infrastructure, does not have a Gentoo Foundation copyright. The council may try to impose a deadline on PMS but it is a non-Gentoo project and thus out of its scope of influence in all areas besides areas of mutual coordination. Significant contributions to PMS are coming from Ciaran, someone who has been explicitly banned from Gentoo development, but this is OK as it is not a Gentoo project. The specification is designed to document that functionality that ebuilds can rely on. Paludis, a non-Gentoo project lead by Ciaran, will likely be the first conformant implementation, after which the process will begin to get it adopted as official policy for Gentoo ebuilds, via the Council and QA. As such, it will likely have long-term impact on the way that Gentoo writes ebuilds. I *think* I have all that right? OK, I will accept this. If that's the case, I'm suggesting the following tweak to the plans. a) move PMS discussion off this list Rationale: it's not an official Gentoo project. It doesn't get any simpler than that. Interested Gentoo devs can subscribe to a PMS list hosted on non-Gentoo infrastructure. It's also not worth keeping PMS on this list for a number of reasons, and confuses people (me included) as to whether it is an official Gentoo project. b) You (Ciaran) should unsubscribe from this list. Rationale: You (Ciaran) have already been explicitly banned from Gentoo development yet are acting as the project's official spokesman on this list which is clearly a Gentoo development list. I am asking that you have a basic respect for your removal from Gentoo, despite your personal feelings, which to me means that you are not involved as a developer on a day-to-day basis and not working directly with other Gentoo developers - except those that might want or need to work with you on non-Gentoo projects (who can then freely interact with you on non-Gentoo lists.) This should not impede your work or that of PMS, as interested parties can just subscribe to those non-Gentoo lists. In fact I expect this will help to accelerate PMS development dramatically. From the perspective of Gentoo developers, it should also reduce flames and hard feelings on this list, and allow Gentoo devs to have a Gentoo-esque environment for Gentoo projects that is fully governed by devrel and that Gentoo developers can be comfortable in. Ciaran, everyone: My overarching goal is that *boundaries are respected*, whatever they might be (in this case they were damn confusing to figure out.) They exist for a reason, and whether or not you agree with them they should be respected. I apologize to anyone I might have offended in my effort to figure these out. Really. Sorry. That being said, I think my suggestions make *TOTAL SENSE* for both. I hope that even those people who got irritated with me understand where I was coming from and will seriously consider my suggestions in this email. Let's take some quick and decisive action to get Gentoo and PMS going in the right direction again, please. *That* is what I have been trying to do, with the priority placed on getting Gentoo going in the right direction. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 20:46:35 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why is it a developer-only privilege? You just made that up. To co-lead a Gentoo project? I'm not co-leading it. You keep making things up. Stop doing that. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Daniel Robbins wrote: Rationale: You (Ciaran) have already been explicitly banned from Gentoo development yet are acting as the project's official spokesman on this list which is clearly a Gentoo development list. I am asking that you have a basic respect for your removal from Gentoo, despite your personal feelings, which to me means that you are not involved as a developer on a day-to-day basis and not working directly with other Gentoo developers - except those that might want or need to work with you on non-Gentoo projects (who can then freely interact with you on non-Gentoo lists.) There is a difference between being banned from Gentoo development and losing developer status. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
OK. If that's not possible, I'll push for the banned from gentoo development status as it obviously makes sense, will help Gentoo, and will not impact PMS. If Ciaran is sticking around on this list using PMS as a pretext to insult various people and projects, then this is more than acceptable grounds to be banned from gentoo development IMO and thus allow my suggestion to be put into action. Really, I don't see any reason for any party to fight my suggestion, as it would benefit everyone. If people are truly concerned about productivity, then I would expect them to support it. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Daniel Robbins wrote: Rationale: You (Ciaran) have already been explicitly banned from Gentoo development yet are acting as the project's official spokesman on this list which is clearly a Gentoo development list. I am asking that you have a basic respect for your removal from Gentoo, despite your personal feelings, which to me means that you are not involved as a developer on a day-to-day basis and not working directly with other Gentoo developers - except those that might want or need to work with you on non-Gentoo projects (who can then freely interact with you on non-Gentoo lists.) There is a difference between being banned from Gentoo development and losing developer status. Regards, Petteri -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Hello Daniel On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 10:32:40AM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: If people are truly concerned about productivity, then I would expect them to support it. To me it seems that you aren't concerned about productivity, otherwise you wouldn't top-post. Please stop doing it and learn how to quote properly. I'm not going to comment on anything else in this thread. Thanks, Michael -- Gentoo Linux developer, http://hansmi.ch/, http://forkbomb.ch/ pgpXuerbQ7fXe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Dňa Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:32:40 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] napísal: Really, I don't see any reason for any party to fight my suggestion, as it would benefit everyone. If people are truly concerned about productivity, then I would expect them to support it. I am concerned about PMS to be done right, and I think Ciaran is one of the most qualified people to do it (as I already stated). Therefore I disagree with your attempts to ban him from gentoo development, as it would hurt Gentoo, instead of increasing productivity. I'm not going to actively fight your suggestion though, because I have packages to maintain and only limited time, which you're already cutting into with your nonsensical notions about boundaries. -- Andrej Kacian ticho at gentoo org Gentoo Linux developer - net-mail, antivirus, sound, x86 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:03:54 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In defense of my confusion, certainly appears from the perspective of the gentoo-dev ml that you are leading at the very least the day-to-day management of the project. No, as I've already told you, I'm just the one who hasn't decided to ignore all this pointless noise yet. PMS is a project that is not an offical Gentoo project, but is controlled by a Gentoo developer (spb), is hosted on external infrastructure, does not have a Gentoo Foundation copyright. PMS is a QA subproject. It even has a subproject page now. The council may try to impose a deadline on PMS but it is a non-Gentoo project and thus out of its scope of influence in all areas besides areas of mutual coordination. The Council imposing a deadline upon PMS would have exactly the same effect as the Council imposing a deadline upon anything else. Significant contributions to PMS are coming from Ciaran, someone who has been explicitly banned from Gentoo development Untrue. I haven't been banned from Gentoo development, and I've been contributing to plenty of things for a long time. The specification is designed to document that functionality that ebuilds can rely on. Paludis, a non-Gentoo project lead by Ciaran, will likely be the first conformant implementation, after which the process will begin to get it adopted as official policy for Gentoo ebuilds, via the Council and QA. The first conformant implementation will likely be Portage, unless Portage has some particularly nasty bugs that take a long time to fix. Paludis will likely be the first conformant *independent* implementation. An independent implementation is generally considered necessary for something to be a proper standard rather than a description of a program. I *think* I have all that right? OK, I will accept this. If that's the case, I'm suggesting the following tweak to the plans. a) move PMS discussion off this list That would be great. There has been absolutely nothing of value received from people discussing PMS on this list. Moving it onto a list where the PMS project lead can remove people who contribute nothing to the discussion would be very helpful. It's also not worth keeping PMS on this list for a number of reasons, and confuses people (me included) as to whether it is an official Gentoo project. If you're confused, it's because you didn't do your research before jumping in with all your accusations. b) You (Ciaran) should unsubscribe from this list. Rationale: You (Ciaran) have already been explicitly banned from Gentoo development Untrue. yet are acting as the project's official spokesman on this list which is clearly a Gentoo development list. Also untrue, as you have been told several times. I am asking that you have a basic respect for your removal from Gentoo, despite your personal feelings, which to me means that you are not involved as a developer on a day-to-day basis and not working directly with other Gentoo developers - except those that might want or need to work with you on non-Gentoo projects (who can then freely interact with you on non-Gentoo lists.) Funnily enough, I'm working quite happily with more Gentoo developers that most other Gentoo developers, both on official Gentoo projects and on external projects. This should not impede your work or that of PMS, as interested parties can just subscribe to those non-Gentoo lists. In fact I expect this will help to accelerate PMS development dramatically. If accelerating PMS development is your goal, I suggest you stop commenting upon it... This thread has become a massive waste of time thanks mainly to your input. *That* is what I have been trying to do, with the priority placed on getting Gentoo going in the right direction. I think you need to step back and admit that at present, you're not familiar enough with how Gentoo is operating to provide any kind of input on that sort of topic. Give yourself time to get back into the flow of things, learn what projects like PMS are *before* you start jumping in on discussions. Apologise to everyone whose time you wasted by making them read this thread if you like, but more importantly don't do it again. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:32:40 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really, I don't see any reason for any party to fight my suggestion, as it would benefit everyone. If people are truly concerned about productivity, then I would expect them to support it. If people are truly concerned about productivity, they might want to take a look at the names and development methods associated with Gentoo projects that actually deliver... In the mean time, Daniel, I'm going to ask once more that you drop your personal crusade to do whatever it is you think you're doing here. It's wasting everyone's time and annoying a lot of people. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 12:55 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote: The Gentoo Java project has many users contributing to it and I wouldn't have it any other way. Users contributing is one thing. A former dev that was kicked now contributing as a user is quite different IMHO. One strike is not the same as no strikes. (Neutral comment, not on any side) -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo/Java signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 10:32:40AM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: OK. If that's not possible, I'll push for the banned from gentoo development status as it obviously makes sense, will help Gentoo, and will not impact PMS. If Ciaran is sticking around on this list using PMS as a pretext to insult various people and projects, then this is more than acceptable grounds to be banned from gentoo development IMO and thus allow my suggestion to be put into action. Really, I don't see any reason for any party to fight my suggestion, as it would benefit everyone. If people are truly concerned about productivity, then I would expect them to support it. Banning Ciaran *is* going to hurt PMS as he's been asking many questions related to PMS lately on -dev ML and the discussions have generally been very good imo. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Dňa Sun, 04 Mar 2007 13:24:32 -0500 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] napísal: The Gentoo Java project has many users contributing to it and I wouldn't have it any other way. Users contributing is one thing. A former dev that was kicked now contributing as a user is quite different IMHO. No, in this context it is exactly the same. -- Andrej Kacian ticho at gentoo org Gentoo Linux developer - net-mail, antivirus, sound, x86 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: It's wasting everyone's time and annoying a lot of people. This sniplet was brought to you by the almighty Flaming Guide [1]: | One thing is to frequently refer to us or our. Pretend like people | are with you on this, so the uncertain ones will flock to your side! | | Code listing 1.6: Usage of plurality | email: Stop wasting our time! [1] http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/docs/flame.html -- Kind Regards, Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
I hope this does not generate many if any replies. Some might seen Daniel as a deserter, sell out for leaving much less going to work for M$, and so on. Granted while he was gone, many things have changed. I am sure he is trying to catch up on all that. I am also sure he is appreciative and thankful for all those who kept Gentoo going and moving forward in his absence. But let us all not forget that just like with Linus, without Daniel and his past efforts there would be no Gentoo. In that regard I think we all owe him a level of professional respect and politeness. Which we all also owe each other as well. Granted he like us all is human, and we all make mistakes. No one of use knows everything about all things, past, present, and future. I believe he has good intentions with his return to the project. I think to a certain extend we should follow his lead, because indirectly we already are. We are working on a project he started, under foundations, and other things that were mostly put into place by him. So I we can cut him some slack, and we should all have some level of respect, at least in public, towards the father, creator, and founder of Gentoo. IMHO, from a rather new dev ~7months. So please do not set me on fire or stake me. -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo/Java signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 14:15:36 -0500 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I we can cut him some slack, and we should all have some level of respect, at least in public, towards the father, creator, and founder of Gentoo. What kind of response do you think anyone else would have received had they started repeatedly attacking a project when they didn't even know what that project was, repeatedly tried to interfere with the management of a project when they don't know who is involved with or managing said project, repeatedly posted all kinds of outright lies after having been told that something was untrue and repeatedly resorted to ad hominem attacks in a technical discussion? I'd say that, all things considered, people are showing Daniel an awful lot of respect... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Maybe if Ciaran recognized his past faults, begged pardon and promised to be kinder from now and on, everything would be easier for everyone, everything would calm down. Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 14:15:36 -0500 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I we can cut him some slack, and we should all have some level of respect, at least in public, towards the father, creator, and founder of Gentoo. What kind of response do you think anyone else would have received had they started repeatedly attacking a project when they didn't even know what that project was, repeatedly tried to interfere with the management of a project when they don't know who is involved with or managing said project, repeatedly posted all kinds of outright lies after having been told that something was untrue and repeatedly resorted to ad hominem attacks in a technical discussion? I'd say that, all things considered, people are showing Daniel an awful lot of respect... -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 19:23 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: What kind of response do you think anyone else would have received had they started repeatedly attacking a project when they didn't even know what that project was, repeatedly tried to interfere with the management of a project when they don't know who is involved with or managing said project, repeatedly posted all kinds of outright lies after having been told that something was untrue and repeatedly resorted to ad hominem attacks in a technical discussion? Would that project even exist if it weren't for Daniel's past efforts and contributions? But I do agree, one should try to be as informed as possible on any given topic before voicing an opinion. Which I might very well be guilty of right now ;) However if I view someones comments as uninformed, instead of stating that. I try to provide information to inform them, and let them come to the realization on their own, that they were wrong. -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo/Java signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Ciaran, What I do know is that you should not be allowed to insult random developers like Jakub when it suits you. If things get slightly more unpleasant or unproductive for a brief period of time while I find an appropriate mechanism to remove you from this list (due to AWOL project leadership,) I consider that time well spent. You clearly should not be here. If anyone should apologize, the Gentoo project leadership should apologize for not removing you from the list sooner. This project is screwed if people who act like you are allowed to stick around. Since you seem to agree with me that your participation on this list has been a waste of your time, I await an announcement of a separate PMS list hosted on non-Gentoo infrastructure on which you will discuss your work, as well as your timely unsubscription from this list. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:03:54 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In defense of my confusion, certainly appears from the perspective of the gentoo-dev ml that you are leading at the very least the day-to-day management of the project. No, as I've already told you, I'm just the one who hasn't decided to ignore all this pointless noise yet. PMS is a project that is not an offical Gentoo project, but is controlled by a Gentoo developer (spb), is hosted on external infrastructure, does not have a Gentoo Foundation copyright. PMS is a QA subproject. It even has a subproject page now. The council may try to impose a deadline on PMS but it is a non-Gentoo project and thus out of its scope of influence in all areas besides areas of mutual coordination. The Council imposing a deadline upon PMS would have exactly the same effect as the Council imposing a deadline upon anything else. Significant contributions to PMS are coming from Ciaran, someone who has been explicitly banned from Gentoo development Untrue. I haven't been banned from Gentoo development, and I've been contributing to plenty of things for a long time. The specification is designed to document that functionality that ebuilds can rely on. Paludis, a non-Gentoo project lead by Ciaran, will likely be the first conformant implementation, after which the process will begin to get it adopted as official policy for Gentoo ebuilds, via the Council and QA. The first conformant implementation will likely be Portage, unless Portage has some particularly nasty bugs that take a long time to fix. Paludis will likely be the first conformant *independent* implementation. An independent implementation is generally considered necessary for something to be a proper standard rather than a description of a program. I *think* I have all that right? OK, I will accept this. If that's the case, I'm suggesting the following tweak to the plans. a) move PMS discussion off this list That would be great. There has been absolutely nothing of value received from people discussing PMS on this list. Moving it onto a list where the PMS project lead can remove people who contribute nothing to the discussion would be very helpful. It's also not worth keeping PMS on this list for a number of reasons, and confuses people (me included) as to whether it is an official Gentoo project. If you're confused, it's because you didn't do your research before jumping in with all your accusations. b) You (Ciaran) should unsubscribe from this list. Rationale: You (Ciaran) have already been explicitly banned from Gentoo development Untrue. yet are acting as the project's official spokesman on this list which is clearly a Gentoo development list. Also untrue, as you have been told several times. I am asking that you have a basic respect for your removal from Gentoo, despite your personal feelings, which to me means that you are not involved as a developer on a day-to-day basis and not working directly with other Gentoo developers - except those that might want or need to work with you on non-Gentoo projects (who can then freely interact with you on non-Gentoo lists.) Funnily enough, I'm working quite happily with more Gentoo developers that most other Gentoo developers, both on official Gentoo projects and on external projects. This should not impede your work or that of PMS, as interested parties can just subscribe to those non-Gentoo lists. In fact I expect this will help to accelerate PMS development dramatically. If accelerating PMS development is your goal, I suggest you stop commenting upon it... This thread has become a massive waste of time thanks mainly to your input. *That* is what I have been trying to do, with the priority placed on getting Gentoo going in the right direction. I think you need to step back and admit that at present, you're not familiar enough with how Gentoo is operating to provide any kind of input on that sort of topic. Give yourself time to get back into the flow of things, learn what projects like PMS are *before*
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sunday 04 March 2007, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: Would that project even exist if it weren't for Daniel's past efforts and contributions? if you want to go that route, why dont we all get down on our knees and praise the GNU project for everything they've done, over and over again (which they would like you to do) or, why dont we simply recognize the fact that the only reason anything progresses is because we're all standing on the shoulders of someone else -mike pgptMfCH5Fmly.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Will, I appreciate the spirit of what you posted, but I want to be clear that I do not expect or request any special treatment, so I don't agree with you. We should *always* have some level of respect of gentoo-dev, regardless of who we're talking to. -Daniel On 3/4/07, William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope this does not generate many if any replies. Some might seen Daniel as a deserter, sell out for leaving much less going to work for M$, and so on. Granted while he was gone, many things have changed. I am sure he is trying to catch up on all that. I am also sure he is appreciative and thankful for all those who kept Gentoo going and moving forward in his absence. But let us all not forget that just like with Linus, without Daniel and his past efforts there would be no Gentoo. In that regard I think we all owe him a level of professional respect and politeness. Which we all also owe each other as well. Granted he like us all is human, and we all make mistakes. No one of use knows everything about all things, past, present, and future. I believe he has good intentions with his return to the project. I think to a certain extend we should follow his lead, because indirectly we already are. We are working on a project he started, under foundations, and other things that were mostly put into place by him. So I we can cut him some slack, and we should all have some level of respect, at least in public, towards the father, creator, and founder of Gentoo. IMHO, from a rather new dev ~7months. So please do not set me on fire or stake me. -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo/Java -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
I never said I was informed :) It was helpful to have some things confirmed by people other than Ciaran. -Daniel On 3/4/07, William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 19:23 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: What kind of response do you think anyone else would have received had they started repeatedly attacking a project when they didn't even know what that project was, repeatedly tried to interfere with the management of a project when they don't know who is involved with or managing said project, repeatedly posted all kinds of outright lies after having been told that something was untrue and repeatedly resorted to ad hominem attacks in a technical discussion? Would that project even exist if it weren't for Daniel's past efforts and contributions? But I do agree, one should try to be as informed as possible on any given topic before voicing an opinion. Which I might very well be guilty of right now ;) However if I view someones comments as uninformed, instead of stating that. I try to provide information to inform them, and let them come to the realization on their own, that they were wrong. -- William L. Thomson Jr. Gentoo/Java -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
I agree, the post was well intentioned but as I said before I can't agree with what was suggested. On 3/4/07, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 04 March 2007, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: Would that project even exist if it weren't for Daniel's past efforts and contributions? if you want to go that route, why dont we all get down on our knees and praise the GNU project for everything they've done, over and over again (which they would like you to do) or, why dont we simply recognize the fact that the only reason anything progresses is because we're all standing on the shoulders of someone else -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Yep, I agree. Thanks everyone for being tolerant of my confusion and disruption while I look for a way to remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 14:15:36 -0500 William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I we can cut him some slack, and we should all have some level of respect, at least in public, towards the father, creator, and founder of Gentoo. What kind of response do you think anyone else would have received had they started repeatedly attacking a project when they didn't even know what that project was, repeatedly tried to interfere with the management of a project when they don't know who is involved with or managing said project, repeatedly posted all kinds of outright lies after having been told that something was untrue and repeatedly resorted to ad hominem attacks in a technical discussion? I'd say that, all things considered, people are showing Daniel an awful lot of respect... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 13:14:14 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was helpful to have some things confirmed by people other than Ciaran. So now you're calling me a liar too? If you meant something else by that remark, please explain, because I'm having a very hard time coming up with an interpretation that means anything else. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 01:17:03PM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: Yep, I agree. Thanks everyone for being tolerant of my confusion and disruption while I look for a way to remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev. Stop it. You don't like him, fine. I personally don't like you, no problem. And many people hate me, good too. Please go back to your hacking and improve Gentoo. You just can't 'remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev', live with it, or leave Gentoo if you don't like the way we do things now. - ferdy -- Fernando J. Pereda Garcimartín Gentoo Developer (Alpha,net-mail,mutt,git) 20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4 pgpAkszCnFlph.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 13:03:39 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If anyone should apologize, the Gentoo project leadership should apologize for not removing you from the list sooner. This project is screwed if people who act like you are allowed to stick around. One more time. Please stop with the personal attacks, threats and deliberate outright lies. Calm down, step back and realise your position within the project and stop trying to abuse your former status. So far within this thread, you've managed to launch groundless attacks against me, a whole bunch of other Gentoo developers, the Council, the Foundation and devrel. If you don't cut this out I'll escalate this to the appropriate parties rather than let this pointless noise carry on even longer than it already has. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
That's actually a very good idea. I definitely don't want to be associated with this project. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Fernando J. Pereda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 01:17:03PM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: Yep, I agree. Thanks everyone for being tolerant of my confusion and disruption while I look for a way to remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev. Stop it. You don't like him, fine. I personally don't like you, no problem. And many people hate me, good too. Please go back to your hacking and improve Gentoo. You just can't 'remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev', live with it, or leave Gentoo if you don't like the way we do things now. - ferdy -- Fernando J. Pereda Garcimartín Gentoo Developer (Alpha,net-mail,mutt,git) 20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
C'mon, I am not calling you a liar. I just don't always take everything you say at face value. Call it a trust issue. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 13:14:14 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was helpful to have some things confirmed by people other than Ciaran. So now you're calling me a liar too? If you meant something else by that remark, please explain, because I'm having a very hard time coming up with an interpretation that means anything else. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 01:46:38PM -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: C'mon, I am not calling you a liar. I just don't always take everything you say at face value. Call it a trust issue. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 13:14:14 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was helpful to have some things confirmed by people other than Ciaran. So now you're calling me a liar too? If you meant something else by that remark, please explain, because I'm having a very hard time coming up with an interpretation that means anything else. Daniel, please stop top posting. It's a terribly bad habbit that I guess you picked up from the horrible MS Outlook client :P That said, could you both (Daniel + Ciaran) please stop this fight? It's not getting us anywhere at all and just adds to the frustrations many people currently feel. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Daniel Robbins wrote: Yep, I agree. Thanks everyone for being tolerant of my confusion and disruption while I look for a way to remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev. Daniel, Are you saying that all of your comments regarding PMS were made solely for the purpose of removing Ciaran from the gentoo-dev mailing list? -- Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh Total Knowledge. CTO http://www.total-knowledge.com -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Fernando J. Pereda wrote: Please go back to your hacking and improve Gentoo. You just can't 'remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev', live with it, or leave Gentoo if you don't like the way we do things now. I agree. Daniel, you need to accept the fact that you no longer have the power to do any idiotic thing you want anymore. -- David Shakaryan GnuPG Public Key: 0x4B8FE14B signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On 3/4/07, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you've managed to launch groundless attacks against me, a whole bunch of other Gentoo developers, the Council, the Foundation and devrel. Well, I think it's a good thing to question whether the Council, the Foundation and devrel are really doing their jobs. If you read some of your previous emails you'll find that you agree with me. Hopefully someone(s) will eventually wake up and start moving this project in the right direction. I'm going to resign and focus on more meaningful uses of my time, as I find the project unbearable at the moment and it would take a tremendous amount of my time to get it to the point where I would actually enjoy being here. -Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Ciaran McCreesh wrote the following on 04.03.2007 21:26 : On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 13:14:14 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It was helpful to have some things confirmed by people other than Ciaran. So now you're calling me a liar too? [...] I followed this discussion for what seems ages now. I'm not a dev, just a user a little sad with the mood on gentoo-dev so feel free to ignore me... Ciaran, you're obviously talented and don't mean harm but seriously you should calm down. Trust is something you build. If I'm not mistaken, Daniel didn't have time to build trust in you yet. Checking with others what you say is a way to build (or not) trust in you so you shouldn't take offense. Something people should read more often (and Ciaran is not the only one that can benefit from it, most of passionate people tend to drown themselves into flamewars, human nature I guess): http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt My 2 cents, Lionel. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
No, I did not say that _all_ of my comments were solely for that purpose. However, I personally would not stay subscribed to gentoo-dev with Ciaran on the list. I think there are others who have the same perspective and tend to either ignore -dev or have unsubscribed. Ciaran is also clearly wasting a lot of his own time, even before my stream of posts, so I don't consider removing him from the list as being bad for him *or* Gentoo. Just as a note, I've resigned as a Gentoo dev so I'm going to at some point today unsubscribe from -dev and stop replying to -dev emails. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Daniel Robbins wrote: Yep, I agree. Thanks everyone for being tolerant of my confusion and disruption while I look for a way to remove Ciaran from gentoo-dev. Daniel, Are you saying that all of your comments regarding PMS were made solely for the purpose of removing Ciaran from the gentoo-dev mailing list? -- Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh Total Knowledge. CTO http://www.total-knowledge.com -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Hi Daniel, On 3/4/07, Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just as a note, I've resigned as a Gentoo dev so I'm going to at some point today unsubscribe from -dev and stop replying to -dev emails. -Daniel Thanks for trying, but Gentoo just has too many folks who don't understand the issue with the behaviour of folks like Ciaran. Our recruitment was too focused on technical skills; we never focused on recruitment based around a shared culture, and I honestly think it's too late now (which is why I quit). What do you plan on doing next with your time? Best regards, Stu -- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Hi Stu, I think you're right regarding the current lack of shared culture, as you put it, and the lack of will to do anything about it. As for what I'm doing next with my time, let me just say that Ciaran need not fear for his personal safety :) Other than that, we will see. I'm open to ideas. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Daniel, On 3/4/07, Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just as a note, I've resigned as a Gentoo dev so I'm going to at some point today unsubscribe from -dev and stop replying to -dev emails. -Daniel Thanks for trying, but Gentoo just has too many folks who don't understand the issue with the behaviour of folks like Ciaran. Our recruitment was too focused on technical skills; we never focused on recruitment based around a shared culture, and I honestly think it's too late now (which is why I quit). What do you plan on doing next with your time? Best regards, Stu -- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 09:51:34PM +, Stuart Herbert wrote: What do you plan on doing next with your time? How cute, but please take this in private and not in the list. Honestly, we do not care... -- Alexander Færøy Bugday Lead Alpha/IA64/MIPS Architecture Teams User Relations, Quality Assurance pgpFq5v6LRffm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Alexander Færøy napsal(a): On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 09:51:34PM +, Stuart Herbert wrote: What do you plan on doing next with your time? How cute, but please take this in private and not in the list. Honestly, we do not care... I certainly do care - more than I could ever care about all the 'valuable input' provided so kindly here by ciaranm, which is so valuable that it has cost us two developers in two days. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] forwarding a video
a video sent to out by a good mate http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645 ++ I think recruiters should keep this link in mind. -- Best Regards, Piotr Jaroszyński -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Be careful, I'm now a Gentoo user, and you're on userrel. Userrel shouldn't launch gratuitious insults at Gentoo users. Thank you for not caring. -Daniel On 3/4/07, Alexander Færøy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 09:51:34PM +, Stuart Herbert wrote: What do you plan on doing next with your time? How cute, but please take this in private and not in the list. Honestly, we do not care... -- Alexander Færøy Bugday Lead Alpha/IA64/MIPS Architecture Teams User Relations, Quality Assurance -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] forwarding a video
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 11:19:35PM +0100, Piotr Jaroszy??ski wrote: a video sent to out by a good mate http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645 ++ I think recruiters should keep this link in mind. And do what? It's terribly hard to spot poisonous people in advance so recruiters would probably be the least likely devrel group to gain from this imo. Besides, you don't need to be an official developer at all to cause problems as the gentoo community (on purpose) is much wider than just the people with commit access. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] forwarding a video
And do what? And hand it to the new devs. That's all I meant ;] -- Best Regards, Piotr Jaroszyński -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Hi, recruitment was too focused on technical skills Yes, this is my point of view too. It can even be discouraging to people wishing to help with gentoo. That's probably why it is so hard to renew developer pool. I have been involved in gentoo for nearly 5 years now (2 officialy), but honestly if today I had to choose to do it again, I'm not sure I would do it again. As Doug said : We need a complete inward look from top to bottom From a frenchy like me, whose country if known to *love* administrative tasks, papers, etc... gentoo is going in the same way : a lot of rules, a very complex architecture. Maybe just too complex ? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 07:32 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: I'm also curious as to why people should be expected to assign copyright to a group that is known for licence violations and removing attribution from documents. How does this protect anything? Yeah, you cry foul when people paint you with an overly broad brush. Is it known? As far as I remember, the issue was acknowledged when brought up, and then fixed. The issue hasn't come up again with your docs. It hasn't come up with any other thing. So how exactly, is this group known for doing these things? Honestly, it doesn't seem like you even read your own mails. It's like you pop a pill and go off into la-la-land where everyone is out to attack you, and the only one allowed to say anything with sweeping generalisations without justifications is you. If anyone said anything remotely in this vein about you or yours, you'd be off on so many tangents, nobody could keep count. And you'd be asking for endless justification after justification of every little syllable. You would actually gain back some respect if you behaved the way you expect everyone else to behave. If you wouldn't want this sort of brush to be used on you, how are you getting off using it yourself? Grow up. Seemant -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Hi, recruitment was too focused on technical skills Yes, this is my point of view too. It can even be discouraging to people wishing to help with gentoo. That's probably why it is so hard to renew developer pool. I have been involved in gentoo for nearly 5 years now (2 officialy), but honestly if today I had to choose to do it again, I'm not sure I would do it again. As Doug said : We need a complete inward look from top to bottom From a frenchy like me, whose country if known to *love* administrative tasks, papers, etc... gentoo is going in the same way : a lot of rules, a very complex architecture. Maybe just too complex ? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Daniel Robbins wrote: However, I personally would not stay subscribed to gentoo-dev with Ciaran on the list. So, instead of quietly un-subscribing you launch in a huge flamefest, by hijacking an important discussion thread. I think there are others who have the same perspective and tend to either ignore -dev or have unsubscribed. Ciaran is also clearly wasting a lot of his own time, even before my stream of posts, so I don't consider removing him from the list as being bad for him *or* Gentoo. So, is this where end justifies all means comes in? Now, I understand you are finally unsubscribing, which is fine. I just want this on a record: you used a technical discussion for purely political purposes. I'm happy that at least you came out with explicit statement about that, and I wish more people would recognize emails, such as yours, as having no technical merit, while being loaded with political purposes on their own, without being explicitly told so. Best regards, Ilya. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Little respect towards Daniel please
Hubert Mercier wrote: That's probably why it is so hard to renew developer pool. Why do people keep repeating this myth? As kloeri pointed out, developer base keeps growing constantly. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Seemant Kulleen napsal(a): On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 07:32 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: I'm also curious as to why people should be expected to assign copyright to a group that is known for licence violations and removing attribution from documents. How does this protect anything? Yeah, you cry foul when people paint you with an overly broad brush. Is it known? As far as I remember, the issue was acknowledged when brought up, and then fixed. The issue hasn't come up again with your docs. It hasn't come up with any other thing. Erm, to be precise here, noone has removed any ciaranm's attributions from devmanual, they've all been moved to the end of the document originally, so that people wouldn't be forced to scroll across one page worth of contributors to get to the actual content of devmanual. And of course this was a great occasion to start screaming about license violation and demand bigger fonts on devmanual frontpage. [1] As said, grow up. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=150231#c5 -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:03:54 -0700 Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a) move PMS discussion off this list That is the whole joke here: It was more or less you who started this discussion. The original mail was Mike mentioning something about a deadline on the PMS project as agenda item for the next council meeting, and Ciaran as a person involved in that project asked what that item was really about (as the council didn't set deadlines previously AFAIK). Then the problems started when Mike more or less refused to answer that question and things went out of control when you got involved and the question of is PMS a Gentoo project came up (not blaming you, but that was the trigger from my POV). Marius -- Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 00:08:40 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, you cry foul when people paint you with an overly broad brush. Is it known? As far as I remember, the issue was acknowledged when brought up, and then fixed. The issue hasn't come up again with your docs. It hasn't come up with any other thing. Erm, to be precise here, noone has removed any ciaranm's attributions from devmanual, they've all been moved to the end of the document originally, so that people wouldn't be forced to scroll across one page worth of contributors to get to the actual content of devmanual. Nnope. All credits except for one name (of someone whose contributions were limited to a few sentences) were removed from the front page entirely, completely in violation of the licence. Repeated requests to the editor to fix it were ignored, so I escalated it to the appropriate party -- wherein certain people in positions of authority tried as hard as they could to claim that there was no licence violation and that following the licence wasn't important. Instead of getting fixed as soon as I notified anyone of the issue, it was dragged out for ages for political reasons. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Ciaran McCreesh napsal(a): On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 00:08:40 +0100 Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Erm, to be precise here, noone has removed any ciaranm's attributions from devmanual, they've all been moved to the end of the document originally, so that people wouldn't be forced to scroll across one page worth of contributors to get to the actual content of devmanual. Nnope. All credits except for one name (of someone whose contributions were limited to a few sentences) were removed from the front page entirely, completely in violation of the licence. Erm yes, you wanted bigger fonts on a front page, already said that multiple times (plus everyone can read the bug). Noone removed any credits from the doc itself, they were moved to a different place for the reason I've stated above. Stop this already, we've been thru this once and that's been really enough, I fail to see why are you bringing up this issue here again and abusing it for completely false generalisations (as quoted by seemant in his mail). -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Hi, Why do people keep repeating this myth? As kloeri pointed out, developer base keeps growing constantly. That's really a good news. And yo're right of course, developer base keeps growing. But... A problem remains : is a fresh developer as efficient as a guru devlopper ?. Of course, I don't mean that fresh devs make bad work (thanks guys for the nice work you make, really), I just mean that for each old dev who retire, a new dev cannot replace him automagically. It takes some time, to know each other, learn the way things are used to be done, etc.. And especially with such a complex organisation, this represents a lot of work ! What is more, even if Gentoo is always growing, why are people leaving ? Personal reasons ? No, in fact I read carefully each of the retire mails in the last year : very often people are just fed up with conflicts, tired of people just slacking around, etc.. Are these last counted in growing dev base ? IMHO, Gentoo need a large rethinking of its internal structure, and, what is more, a rethinking of its recruitement process. But I remember that this point has already been discussed ? In the last months, a some talented devs gone, and a few others were thinking to do so. How much more before deciding to simplify our organisation ? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 11:31:56PM +, Hubert Mercier wrote: What is more, even if Gentoo is always growing, why are people leaving ? Personal reasons ? No, in fact I read carefully each of the retire mails in the last year : very often people are just fed up with conflicts, tired of people just slacking around, etc.. Are these last counted in growing dev base ? IMHO, Gentoo need a large rethinking of its internal structure, and, what is more, a rethinking of its recruitement process. But I remember that this point has already been discussed ? Please don't base your entire opinion on those very few retirement announcements you've seen. Most devs that retire simply run out of time for gentoo due to real life commitments etc. or move on to other open source projects. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK=/etc/env.d
No response means no objections means in it goes. On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 01:07:47 + Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can't remember whether I already mailed about this, but better safe than sorry. Currently /etc/env.d is added to CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK in make.globals, and as far as i can tell nowhere in profiles. Anyone object if I add it to base/make.defaults? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 23:31:56 + (UTC) Hubert Mercier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the last months, a some talented devs gone, and a few others were thinking to do so. How much more before deciding to simplify our organisation ? Simplifying it won't help. If Gentoo wants more developers, it has to do three things: * Start delivering again. Not just shiny things, although some new shiny things would help, but also things that users and developers really need. * Substantially reduce user-visible breakages and breakages caused by carelessness or deliberate negligence that take huge amounts of time to fix. * Reduce the amount of arcane undocumented voodoo. The only relevance of organisational issues is whether they help or hinder in achieving those objectives. PMS, in a round-about way, helps with all three. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail: ciaranm at ciaranm.org Web : http://ciaranm.org/ Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
Daniel Robbins wrote: Ciaran, What I do know is that you should not be allowed to insult random developers like Jakub when it suits you. If things get slightly more unpleasant or unproductive for a brief period of time while I find an appropriate mechanism to remove you from this list (due to AWOL project leadership,) I consider that time well spent. You clearly should not be here. No, you sir, should not be here. I've been a 'developer' since before you left us for Microsoft. I've read the -dev and -core since that time, only chiming in from time to time but this frankly is crazy. Daniel, you left and are now back. Ciaranm never left, but was forced out by idiots but still contributes. Please sit down for a week and read what has transpired since you left. Ciaranm may not be an angel, and probably ranks up there as one of the grumpiest people I know, but I've worked with him in the past and he has not crossed me. He is defending himself on this list against you, because you seem fit to declare some bi-polar view of Gentoo. Sorry bucko, Gentoo is no longer yours so stop treating it as yours. I call for a ban of Danial Robbins from Gentoo for the express purpose of ending flame fest before it tears Gentoo apart. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2007-03-04 23h59 UTC
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2007-03-04 23h59 UTC. Removals: sys-devel/gcc-compat2007-02-26 01:35:38 vapier net-misc/nxserver-business 2007-02-26 22:34:19 genstef net-misc/nxserver-enterprise2007-02-26 22:34:19 genstef net-misc/nxserver-personal 2007-02-26 22:34:19 genstef app-admin/livecd-ng 2007-02-27 16:29:39 wolf31o2 app-cdr/gcombust2007-02-28 14:35:10 pylon sys-devel/gcc-hppa642007-02-28 17:24:50 gmsoft kde-base/unsermake 2007-02-28 20:24:52 caleb net-misc/djmount2007-03-01 05:29:31 cardoe dev-embedded/gpsim-logic2007-03-01 11:46:32 calchan dev-embedded/gpsim-led 2007-03-01 11:47:43 calchan mail-client/ximian-connector2007-03-02 18:02:25 dang net-misc/yasuc 2007-03-02 20:50:32 nelchael media-sound/choad 2007-03-03 02:14:04 tester media-sound/gradio 2007-03-03 02:14:04 tester media-sound/liteamp 2007-03-03 02:14:04 tester media-sound/mpio2007-03-03 02:14:04 tester media-sound/pd-cyclone 2007-03-03 02:14:05 tester media-sound/psmix 2007-03-03 02:14:05 tester media-sound/sulu2007-03-03 02:14:05 tester media-video/ks3switch 2007-03-03 02:19:57 tester sys-apps/s3switch 2007-03-03 02:22:08 tester app-admin/kcmgrunlevel 2007-03-03 02:24:00 tester www-client/ci 2007-03-03 02:26:34 tester www-client/gorua2007-03-03 02:26:34 tester dev-ruby/ruby-gconf 2007-03-03 02:31:29 tester dev-ruby/ruby-gdkimlib 2007-03-03 02:31:29 tester dev-ruby/ruby-gdkpixbuf 2007-03-03 02:31:29 tester dev-ruby/ruby-libart2007-03-03 02:31:29 tester app-portage/kentoo 2007-03-03 02:32:40 tester www-client/khttrack 2007-03-03 02:34:07 tester dev-java/jdbc3-firebird 2007-03-03 07:45:15 wltjr net-analyzer/prelude-nids 2007-03-03 18:09:27 jokey net-analyzer/prelude-nagios 2007-03-03 18:16:32 jokey net-fs/smbfs2007-03-04 14:59:47 uberlord dev-php5/pecl-pdo-firebird 2007-03-04 18:42:00 chtekk dev-php4/pecl-apd 2007-03-04 18:46:09 chtekk dev-php5/pecl-apd 2007-03-04 18:47:58 chtekk Additions: app-dicts/libydpdict2007-02-26 21:01:16 peper net-dialup/picocom 2007-02-27 17:44:56 vapier xfce-extra/xfce4-radio 2007-02-27 18:20:08 drac mail-client/claws-mail-pdf-viewer 2007-02-27 20:36:10 ticho xfce-extra/xfce4-cellmodem 2007-02-27 21:03:55 drac dev-python/nose 2007-02-27 23:11:10 dev-zero dev-python/routes 2007-02-27 23:22:24 dev-zero dev-python/python-openid2007-02-27 23:29:23 dev-zero dev-python/paste2007-02-27 23:40:20 dev-zero dev-python/pastedeploy 2007-02-27 23:43:38 dev-zero dev-python/pastescript 2007-02-27 23:46:25 dev-zero dev-python/myghty 2007-02-27 23:49:39 dev-zero dev-python/myghtyutils 2007-02-27 23:52:54 dev-zero dev-python/beaker 2007-02-27 23:55:19 dev-zero dev-python/simplejson 2007-02-27 23:59:45 dev-zero dev-python/webhelpers 2007-02-28 00:02:24 dev-zero dev-python/genshi 2007-02-28 00:05:37 dev-zero dev-python/pylons 2007-02-28 00:08:39 dev-zero dev-python/turbocheetah 2007-02-28 00:11:37 dev-zero dev-python/turbokid 2007-02-28 00:13:37 dev-zero dev-python/ruledispatch 2007-02-28 00:19:35 dev-zero dev-python/turbojson2007-02-28 00:22:28 dev-zero dev-python/configobj2007-02-28 00:28:21 dev-zero dev-python/turbogears 2007-02-28 00:32:40 dev-zero dev-python/dpkt 2007-02-28 00:37:11 dev-zero dev-python/pypcap 2007-02-28 00:40:50 dev-zero app-arch/fastjar2007-02-28 12:13:02 betelgeuse app-emulation/virtualbox-modules2007-02-28 18:34:32 jokey net-p2p/createtorrent 2007-02-28 22:55:09 armin76 media-libs/libkarma
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
I already removed myself from Gentoo - no need. Will be unsubscribing from -dev at the end of the day. On 3/4/07, bret curtis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Daniel Robbins wrote: Ciaran, What I do know is that you should not be allowed to insult random developers like Jakub when it suits you. If things get slightly more unpleasant or unproductive for a brief period of time while I find an appropriate mechanism to remove you from this list (due to AWOL project leadership,) I consider that time well spent. You clearly should not be here. No, you sir, should not be here. I've been a 'developer' since before you left us for Microsoft. I've read the -dev and -core since that time, only chiming in from time to time but this frankly is crazy. Daniel, you left and are now back. Ciaranm never left, but was forced out by idiots but still contributes. Please sit down for a week and read what has transpired since you left. Ciaranm may not be an angel, and probably ranks up there as one of the grumpiest people I know, but I've worked with him in the past and he has not crossed me. He is defending himself on this list against you, because you seem fit to declare some bi-polar view of Gentoo. Sorry bucko, Gentoo is no longer yours so stop treating it as yours. I call for a ban of Danial Robbins from Gentoo for the express purpose of ending flame fest before it tears Gentoo apart. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Some council topics for March meeting
bret curtis napsal(a): No, you sir, should not be here. I've been a 'developer' since before you left us for Microsoft. I've read the -dev and -core since that time, only chiming in from time to time but this frankly is crazy. This sniplet was brought to you by the almighty Flaming Guide [1]: snip Another way to handle things is with experience. Come up to the plate with your 10 years work and bash them down with it! Code listing 1.5: Experience email: I've been doing this for 10 years, so even though your logic is sound, shutup! /snip [1] http://dev.gentoo.org/~chriswhite/docs/flame.html Ciaranm never left, but was forced out by idiots Well done, nice insult of lots of people. Really helpful. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Sad
Hi, Disclaimer**: this mail is not meant to point the finger at someone, as I (thankfully) don't know enough about who did what first to whom to do that; in fact, I think no one does at this point. Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: On Sun, 4 Mar 2007 23:31:56 + (UTC) Hubert Mercier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the last months, a some talented devs gone, and a few others were thinking to do so. How much more before deciding to simplify our organisation ? Simplifying it won't help. If Gentoo wants more developers, it has to do three things: * Start delivering again. Not just shiny things, although some new shiny things would help, but also things that users and developers really need. * Substantially reduce user-visible breakages and breakages caused by carelessness or deliberate negligence that take huge amounts of time to fix. * Reduce the amount of arcane undocumented voodoo. And, above all, * stop to treat -dev (and the projects) as the ideal battleground for personalities, the home of flames, the temple of mailwar. You know what people state* as the major benefit from using Gentoo? It's not portage, not the tree, certainly not stability or ease of use, it's two things, the community and flexibility. In this order. You all are a very visible part of that community. The only relevance of organisational issues is whether they help or hinder in achieving those objectives. I'll use those words for my point, instead. The above list could be the agenda of Microsoft, too (or Sun, IBM, ...); I don't want to say they're unimportant, that would of course be wrong, but is *this* the core of Gentoo? If you deliver, how you behave doesn't count? Scream all you like, if you attach a patch? Hey, let's make each others life hell, as long as we get releases out the door. Will that work? I doubt it. PMS, in a round-about way, helps with all three. Regards, Thomas (who is just a user, until last week was pondering to help out, until today advocated Gentoo, and who cares too much for it to stay quiet, even if he doubts anyone will read this mail the way it was meant to be) * Yes, people I ask and people i know. No, I don't have a statistic at hand. I can make one up if you want :-). ** Gentoo-Dev, where mails need a disclaimer, or someone *will* take it personal. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Bryan Østergaard kloeri at gentoo.org writes: On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 11:16:47PM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote: Alexander Færøy napsal(a): On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 09:51:34PM +, Stuart Herbert wrote: What do you plan on doing next with your time? How cute, but please take this in private and not in the list. Honestly, we do not care... I certainly do care - more than I could ever care about all the 'valuable input' provided so kindly here by ciaranm, which is so valuable that it has cost us two developers in two days. Jakub, please stop. While I'm sure many of us (myself included) is interested in what Daniel is going to do in the future a development list isn't the place. Instead, I'm looking forward to reading about it on Daniels blog (Yeah, I'm assuming he's going to blog about it). Regards, Bryan Østergaard Bryan, instead of always addressing the symptoms by asking people to kindly be quiet or move things elsewhere, why don't you do something more substantive about what ails Gentoo developers? You're head of Developer Relations. That makes you partly responsible for allowing what should only be minor differences of opinion between developers (and ex-developers and users) to balloon out of control until the atmosphere around Gentoo becomes so unpleasant some developers decide it's better to quit than try to stick around and solve problems. Face it, every time that happens you've failed to do your job. By trying to silence parties involved in a disagreement you only force their differences to manifest in less desirble ways. And when that happens, things tend to get really ugly and it inevitably reflects back on Gentoo. Also, brushing things over to private email and private blogs is not always the answer because the issues behind these disagreements often involve (and just as importantly, affect) more than 2 people. Just because Daniel Robbins might now be taking things over to his private blog doesn't mean you no longer have to deal with the issues he attempted to have a public discussion about. Gentoo should provide an official venue where developers (and ex-developers and users) can talk out their disagreements, and under a few plainly spelled-out and easily enforceable guidelines designed to keep the discourse somewhat civil. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Bryan Østergaard napsal(a): On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 11:31:56PM +, Hubert Mercier wrote: What is more, even if Gentoo is always growing, why are people leaving ? Personal reasons ? No, in fact I read carefully each of the retire mails in the last year : very often people are just fed up with conflicts, tired of people just slacking around, etc.. Are these last counted in growing dev base ? IMHO, Gentoo need a large rethinking of its internal structure, and, what is more, a rethinking of its recruitement process. But I remember that this point has already been discussed ? Please don't base your entire opinion on those very few retirement announcements you've seen. Most devs that retire simply run out of time for gentoo due to real life commitments etc. or move on to other open source projects. Regards, Bryan Østergaard OK, let me get this straight... You are suggesting here that we are not losing enough developers for devrel/userrel to be bothered enough to start caring about WTH is going wrong here? Sure, after Flameeyes left we have pam + alsa pretty much unmaintained, we've lost a key KDE + sound apps developer + BSD lead; next we've lost metalgod who was a member of already pretty understaffed Gnome herd, one of 3 members of media-optical herd and sounds apps maintainer as well. Then a developer and founder of this distribution who rejoined just about a week ago ran away, scared when seeing the state of things. That's just for the past month. And you come here to tell us that people shouldn't get confused by these 'very few' retirements, that the sun in still shining nicely and we are recruiting people as always? And that you will continue silently watching the trolls team associated around mips and ciaranm call people fuckheads, idiots and making a gutter of something that's supposed to be a development mailing list? Ugh... well done. -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Argument resolution [was: Re: Little respect towards Daniel please]
Alex Tarkovsky wrote: By trying to silence parties involved in a disagreement you only force their differences to manifest in less desirble ways. And when that happens, things tend to get really ugly and it inevitably reflects back on Gentoo. Also, brushing things over to private email and private blogs is not always the answer because the issues behind these disagreements often involve (and just as importantly, affect) more than 2 people. Just because Daniel Robbins might now be taking things over to his private blog doesn't mean you no longer have to deal with the issues he attempted to have a public discussion about. Gentoo should provide an official venue where developers (and ex-developers and users) can talk out their disagreements, and under a few plainly spelled-out and easily enforceable guidelines designed to keep the discourse somewhat civil. That's an interesting idea. It would be nice to have a discussion ML, which would have one simple rule enforced. Any discussion _must_ follow formal logic rules. Ensuring that rule is followed could be done in a few different ways. One example: There would be a small group overseeing discussion, and, solely on the basis of formal logic rules, would, for example, suspend a person for a day, in case of violations. Of course, enforcement rules could be slightly more complex. i.e. 2-hour ban for any ad-hominem attack. Two warnings for logic errors, day ban for third one. Or something. These are details that need to be worked out, tested, re-hashed, etc. This would result in a list that would force people to discuss the actual issue (technical, or otherwise), as opposed to do doing all sorts of mud flinging, and, due to temporary bans, would prevent any discussion from deteriorating into flame fest. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Argument resolution [was: Re: Little respect towards Daniel please]
On Sun, Mar 04 2007 19:22, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote: That's an interesting idea. It would be nice to have a discussion ML, which would have one simple rule enforced. Any discussion _must_ follow formal logic rules. Ensuring that rule is followed could be done in a few different ways. One example: There would be a small group overseeing discussion, and, solely on the basis of formal logic rules, would, for example, suspend a person for a day, in case of violations. Of course, enforcement rules could be slightly more complex. i.e. 2-hour ban for any ad-hominem attack. Two warnings for logic errors, day ban for third one. Or something. These are details that need to be worked out, tested, re-hashed, etc. Sounds like a lot of organization, shall we declare what weapons we will use during our encounters, or will we be able to pull anything from the bottom of our hats? This would result in a list that would force people to discuss the actual issue (technical, or otherwise), as opposed to do doing all sorts of mud flinging, and, due to temporary bans, would prevent any discussion from deteriorating into flame fest. Perhaps I am wrong, perhaps there *is* a collective desire to decide things in long ML threads. Though I can't recall when it was the last time I've seen that happen, anywhere. IMHO, this list would just lead people to boredom and desubscription. Cheers. -- redondos pgpG0RNPzaGlm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Argument resolution [was: Re: Little respect towards Daniel please]
Oh, and another idea is to have somewhat more real-time debates on IRC. Procedure could be fairly simple: it would still have a jury group overseeing it. Participants would get voice in turn, present their arguments and counter-arguments. If a participant repeatedly fails to answer opponent's arguments according to formal logic rules, he is denied further turns to speak. Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote: Alex Tarkovsky wrote: By trying to silence parties involved in a disagreement you only force their differences to manifest in less desirble ways. And when that happens, things tend to get really ugly and it inevitably reflects back on Gentoo. Also, brushing things over to private email and private blogs is not always the answer because the issues behind these disagreements often involve (and just as importantly, affect) more than 2 people. Just because Daniel Robbins might now be taking things over to his private blog doesn't mean you no longer have to deal with the issues he attempted to have a public discussion about. Gentoo should provide an official venue where developers (and ex-developers and users) can talk out their disagreements, and under a few plainly spelled-out and easily enforceable guidelines designed to keep the discourse somewhat civil. That's an interesting idea. It would be nice to have a discussion ML, which would have one simple rule enforced. Any discussion _must_ follow formal logic rules. Ensuring that rule is followed could be done in a few different ways. One example: There would be a small group overseeing discussion, and, solely on the basis of formal logic rules, would, for example, suspend a person for a day, in case of violations. Of course, enforcement rules could be slightly more complex. i.e. 2-hour ban for any ad-hominem attack. Two warnings for logic errors, day ban for third one. Or something. These are details that need to be worked out, tested, re-hashed, etc. This would result in a list that would force people to discuss the actual issue (technical, or otherwise), as opposed to do doing all sorts of mud flinging, and, due to temporary bans, would prevent any discussion from deteriorating into flame fest. -- Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh Total Knowledge. CTO http://www.total-knowledge.com -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Argument resolution [was: Re: Little respect towards Daniel please]
Angel Olivera wrote: On Sun, Mar 04 2007 19:22, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote: That's an interesting idea. It would be nice to have a discussion ML, which would have one simple rule enforced. Any discussion _must_ follow formal logic rules. Ensuring that rule is followed could be done in a few different ways. One example: There would be a small group overseeing discussion, and, solely on the basis of formal logic rules, would, for example, suspend a person for a day, in case of violations. Of course, enforcement rules could be slightly more complex. i.e. 2-hour ban for any ad-hominem attack. Two warnings for logic errors, day ban for third one. Or something. These are details that need to be worked out, tested, re-hashed, etc. Sounds like a lot of organization, shall we declare what weapons we will use during our encounters, or will we be able to pull anything from the bottom of our hats? I sense some sort of joke in the tone, but unfortunately don't understand what you mean there. This would result in a list that would force people to discuss the actual issue (technical, or otherwise), as opposed to do doing all sorts of mud flinging, and, due to temporary bans, would prevent any discussion from deteriorating into flame fest. Perhaps I am wrong, perhaps there *is* a collective desire to decide things in long ML threads. I don't remember saying anything about _long_ ML threads. There are very few discussions, that can be carried for a long time when logic and technical side of arguments are strictly followed. However, with that said, I see nothing wrong with long threads, as long as parties involved progress, instead of repeating their own arguments over and over again or resorting to personal attacks (both of which are against formal logic rules). Though I can't recall when it was the last time I've seen that happen, anywhere. Given that you are answering something I didn't say, this point becomes irrelevant. (simple example of logic error). IMHO, this list would just lead people to boredom and desubscription. This list wouldn't be optional. This list would be a place where final discussion on hard-to-resolve issues would occur. Cheers. -- Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh Total Knowledge. CTO http://www.total-knowledge.com -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
