[gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Rob C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a new Gentoo developer but I have worked on a number of other small projects. This list is a disgrace and most flames are nothing but showboating. If you have an issue then deal with it directly with whomever is causing the problem. Dealing it who causes the problem is what the rules were meant to do: They should not change anyones behaviour on a working mailing list, but do so, untill a list works again - that is, is (relatively) free of slandering and so on. Writing cutting comments on the list with no other intention than to belittle or discredit a member of the community is unacceptable. *Even* if your comments happen correct. Well, you could hardly forbid people to say It is a bad idea because xyz might happen. _even_ if it was only meant to discredit someone, because you cant know if it was deliberately harmfull or not. therefore a repetition of the same fact for several times is to be avoided, so there is less picking on somebody. Please, lets use -dev for actual development. Perhaps we can have -bitch or -flame for those who really need to vent or to write mails that they know are blatant flame fodder. I feel like the problem is that those who actually flame do feel like it is absolutely normal and dont seem to see why it is a bad thing to do, thus kindly asking them to stop it wont work, as far as i know of what happened yet. One problem that will likely arise is that some blogs will get even more stupid, yet it is easier to avoid reading a blog than to avoid reading the -dev list, not to mention that active developers should of course apply the same rule of not using invectives in their blog, too. I think it would brighten the appearence of gentoo somewhat again. Some users will maybe still flame for a while, but their fuel should run short after some time I hope. Sincerely, Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Jakub Moc wrote: Bryan Østergaard napsal(a): On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:46:47AM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote: 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? Never said anything like that. So, what are you planning to do about this? Sorry, but all I've seen here so far is evading the real problem and saying people they should ignore ciaranm and alikes. This apparently doesn't work, any other plan? Like, any plan to make the mips team totally poisoned by ciaranm's stupid elitism and infallibleness behave in a civilized way again? I should point out here... that not all of the MIPS team are like Ciaran. I'll admit, I'm not exactly bursting with technical knowledge -- there are some big gaps there. I'd like to change this, however it isn't going to happen overnight. Conversely, I'd like to think that many of us do use significantly more tact than you make out. On a somewhat related note... I've sat back and watched this argument for some time now. Banning people seems like an extremely drastic measure. Sure, it's easy. It's also easily circumvented, and is only a short-term solution. I don't think it's the answer. Nor, I should point out, is treating devrel like the football. They're in a very difficult position here -- one I would not like to be placed in myself. And in this circumstance, they can't afford to be hasty -- the wrong decision could cost Gentoo dearly in many ways that may not be apparent to people now. How's this for an idea though... Rather than banning *people*... why not temporarily ban a thread? I know this is easily possible on forum threads -- mailing lists are more difficult, but if one could lock a thread for a day or so -- that might allow people to cool off before picking up the thread again. I think in such flamewars, it's *everyone* that needs to cool off, not just those who start them. -- Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter) .'''. Gentoo Linux/MIPS Cobalt and Docs Developer '.'` : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'.' http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter :.' I haven't lost my mind... ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Stuart Longland [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gentoo Foundation) wrote: How's this for an idea though... Rather than banning *people*... why not temporarily ban a thread? I know this is easily possible on forum threads -- mailing lists are more difficult, but if one could lock a thread for a day or so -- that might allow people to cool off before picking up the thread again. Nice idea in general, yet people could harm a discussion even more as in they get a tool to delay them as often as they'd like to. Even more would you delay a discussion for a day that worked, except that one person felt like it would be needed to inject a few drops of hostility by using abusive language. I think in such flamewars, it's *everyone* that needs to cool off, not just those who start them. Of course everyone needs to cool off, but (hopefully) most of us can do this themselves, meaning they learned to recognize that they are angry and add the task of replying to there todo-list and do it later on during the day. What I want to say is: To me it looks like to is a relatively small group of people who do get abusive again and again, and after some time others can't stand this anymore and fight back -- flame-war By baning those who get abusive again and again, the problem should thus vanish in mist. On the other hand, if you lock a thread for one day because xyz got abusive for the 3rd time this month, everyone is pissed because the discussion is stopped, xyz is happy because it is something annoying, and xyz is not really likely to stop that because he personally isnt punished, but everyone. If you got a class to teach, and someone played a joke on you, it is likely to work if you punish the whole class with an extra test or more homework, because the majority of the class will dislike the one who did it. The same would happen here, but xyz who was abusive again will not feel that he himself is punished harder than anyone else, since he/she wont be beaten during the break, speaking metaphorically... Cheers, Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 20:45:25 +1000 Stuart Longland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On a somewhat related note... I've sat back and watched this argument for some time now. Banning people seems like an extremely drastic measure. Sure, it's easy. It's also easily circumvented, and is only a short-term solution. I don't think it's the answer. Banning people is not drastic. We do it all the time on #gentoo and we have rules in place to stop ourselves from becoming power crazed maniacs as well as giving banned channel users the benefit of the doubt. Circumventing (evading) a ban on IRC means giving up your nickname, and if you happen to value your own name, you won't, hence you will not evade the ban. The same applies to mailing lists. If you ban a user and he comes back using a different e-mail address, you just ban him again. Getting banned from a community happens to be a lot worse than just not being able to get your point across (i.e. continue the flamewar). Losing the right to use your own [nick]name / e-mail address within a community is an extreme penalty indeed, but if the ban is temporary (in the case of MLs, say two weeks or a month), even the people passing the ban can live with it. How's this for an idea though... Rather than banning *people*... why not temporarily ban a thread? I know this is easily possible on forum threads -- mailing lists are more difficult, but if one could lock a thread for a day or so -- that might allow people to cool off before picking up the thread again. Banning certain threads isn't just infeasible (technically impossible), it's actually worse than banning someone from your community: by banning a thread you censor whoever is left in the community. And actually, circumventing a thread ban is much easier than getting back on a mailing list: you just start a new thread. In fact it happens all the time on this list when someone thinks writing a new subject will make all the difference, or tries to set a new tone to the conversation. It just does not work. Banning certain users, perhaps banning them for a period of time to maybe cool off, is easy to implement and these bans are easy to maintain. What you are suggesting, i.e. moderating the content of this list before it even hits our mailboxes, is censorship of the worst kind, and would be impossible to uphold. As someone suggested before, maybe the forums.g.o people might like to chime in and give their view on debate management? I wouldn't think it gets as heated as IRC does, but maybe there are some parallels between forums and MLs that could be of interest. Kind regards, JeR -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 02:22:08AM +, Alex Tarkovsky wrote: Bryan Østergaard kloeri at gentoo.org writes: 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. I'm not trying to silence anybody. I'm asking people to stop making things worse than they already are. 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. Uhh, I never said anything like that. The only thing I said related to his blog was that whatever he's going to do in the future is off-topic for a gentoo development list if it doesn't involve gentoo development. I think it was quite clear from the context that wasn't the case, so the proper place to tell the world about all the cool things Daniels going to do is his blog imo. 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. Somehow a lot of people seems to think banning is the only possible solution. I tend to think that's a horrible idea myself and most of devrel backs me up on that. If people thinks devrel is doing a horrible job they can ask council to do something about it - replacing devrel or whatever they'd think would solve it. But as long as that hasn't happened devrel is going to work on solving conflicts the best possible way according to their experience and ideas. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:46:47AM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote: 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? Not at all. But don't bother to read what I actually said. I'm sure that would be way too much effort on your part. 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? Never said anything like that. Ugh... well done. And you grabbed the chance to completely distort what I'm saying once again. Well done indeed. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Ioannis Aslanidis wrote: 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. I share your dream ;) 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? Bloody hell where did all that come from? Am I missing something, cos I certainly haven't seen that on the dev m-l. Maybe it's a core/ irc thing, but afaic in the public domain drobbins hasn't done the above. Asking questions shouldn't be an issue. As for his problem with ciaranm, i think a lot of people are fed up with that attitude which is why ciaran was banned from the forums. I wish you guys would just let the forum moderators moderate this mailing list. You'd soon see why the gentoo forums are the envy of the support world. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
I wish you guys would just let the forum moderators moderate this mailing list. You'd soon see why the gentoo forums are the envy of the support world. I agree. I also agree with temporary ban's to reduce flame wars. people need to cool down sometimes. ---concerned gentoo user. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:25:54 + Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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? Bloody hell where did all that come from? Am I missing something, cos I certainly haven't seen that on the dev m-l. Maybe it's a core/ irc thing, but afaic in the public domain drobbins hasn't done the above. Had you bothered to read the -dev mailing list, you'd see all of that. As for his problem with ciaranm, i think a lot of people are fed up with that attitude which is why ciaran was banned from the forums. No, I was banned from the forums for posting a list of the top QA offenders. Which is pretty amusing, when it's considered fine to repeatedly bash the QA team, Gentoo developers that the forum mods don't like and anyone associated with any project the forum mods don't like. I wish you guys would just let the forum moderators moderate this mailing list. You'd soon see why the gentoo forums are the envy of the support world. What, and make everyone move the development discussion elsewhere? Have you noticed how little development discussion goes on on the forums? Have you ever considered why? -- 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] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 16:17:54 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What, and make everyone move the development discussion elsewhere? Have you noticed how little development discussion goes on on the forums? Have you ever considered why? It's full of trolls. Have you considered why little development discussion happens on a development mailing list? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 16:33:31 + Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 16:17:54 + Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What, and make everyone move the development discussion elsewhere? Have you noticed how little development discussion goes on on the forums? Have you ever considered why? It's full of trolls. Have you considered why little development discussion happens on a development mailing list? Hm, the development mailing list usually works just fine -- take a look at the PMS threads where only well-informed people joined in for perfect examoples. It's only when people jump in on projects when they don't know what said project is or what it involves and start trying to derail it that things get messy. -- 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] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:25:31PM +, Steve Long wrote: Ioannis Aslanidis wrote: 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. I share your dream ;) 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? Bloody hell where did all that come from? Am I missing something, cos I certainly haven't seen that on the dev m-l. Maybe it's a core/ irc thing, but afaic in the public domain drobbins hasn't done the above. drobbins has repeatedly claimed that PMS is not a Gentoo project, that Ciaran is leading PMS, that Ciaran's involvement with PMS requires developer status, that Gentoo projects require Gentoo copyright, and more. Having read some of his past and later messages, I don't doubt his intentions are good, but from this thread alone I initially got the same impression Ciaran did, except I did not see any actual ad hominem's from drobbins's side, myself. I did see Ciaran asking drobbins to stop with them in reply to what he apparently considered one. pgpCvfkIkMvZj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Bryan Østergaard napsal(a): On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 03:46:47AM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote: 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? Never said anything like that. So, what are you planning to do about this? Sorry, but all I've seen here so far is evading the real problem and saying people they should ignore ciaranm and alikes. This apparently doesn't work, any other plan? Like, any plan to make the mips team totally poisoned by ciaranm's stupid elitism and infallibleness behave in a civilized way again? Any plan to make -dev ML a productive place for development again? Sorry, ignorance is not a boon, as proved by this thread and many others in the past. -- 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] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Thank you. I am replying off-list because I do not want to create even more flaming. I'm not a dev. Just a user in terms of gentoo. I'm subscribed to the list since I need all the info I can get. And gentoo has definitely come a long way in the last few weeks. First that 8-Day-Flame about saving Dolphins in gentoo-user, now the dev-war. It's nice to see someone pick up a good point and express it. thanks Paul [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Dear list, Why not simply naming the formal logic rules for the official venue where developers (and ex-developers and users) can talk out their disagreements to be: 1. Anyone who is impolite get's kicked off. 2. Anyone who repeatedly and seemingly on purpose tries to harm the discussion will be kicked off. Impolite: Do, under _no_ circumstances, use a word MTV would have to mute, or that your grandmother (hopefully) wouldnt want to hear you say ;-) Repeatedly: We are humans, we make faults. Seemingly: If this wouldnt be part of the rule, there would be endless debates on wether it was on purpose or not. On purpose: We are humans, we make faults, it has to be premeditation or so Kicked off: There is a group of twelve zillion people who just ban those people from the list, or rather, their email-adresses. harming a discussion: a list of things that can be considered harmfull should be set up. sth like pointing out things that are not relevent (like statements the consist of no more than i do not like that idea), or trying to shift the issue to sth different, like oh and besides, you often have typos and so on...sth that does, in no way, help finding a solution is to be considered harmfull in the above sense. I also suggest banning those people from posting only. Plus is suggest banning to be longer. a 2hr ban wont prevent flaming, but will look funny, and is alot of work. (if this was meant seariously) Banning someone for a week, a month, and finally forever are more reasonable time frames i think... I think those rules would ensure people sit back before replying, and think before they write. There simply is no need to flame, get impolite, or harm a discussion, thus i find being as strict as this is okay. How do you think to politicians discuss problems in parliament? Call each other fuckhead if hundrets are watching, screaming through the room while throwing chairs and tables? I doubt it. Things are similar here: We are _alot_ of people and discuss. Certain rules of civilized discussion, that what's usually taught in elementary school, need to be followed here, too. Only that the issue isn't that someone can cut someone else off... If anyone comes up with that the progress of politicians is too slow: It is slow, because they do break one of the above rules, and because they do often search for solutions where there is no objectively clear winner, because the want to keep their power, have personal interests, and so on. And - would you honestly think politicians would get _more_ productive, if they started slandering each other? Yet, here things are somewhat different: Code is more secure, or faster, or smaller, or in another way better than other code, depending on what the most important thing is for this piece of code. And a documentation is more or less understandable for the avg. user / dev, or is more correct, and thus simply is better. Here, i feel like we do not fail because we cannot find the solution that's best for most of us, but we fail because of personal problems. And those could easily be adressed by the above rules, as they in a way - as alot of what is to be considered polite does - 'remove' a part of our personality from the actual progress of discussing, since emotions are suppressed. Shortening discussions to their functional part is sth that would help to adress this issue, and on the other hand people could still become (cyber)friends since there is IRC and private discussions need to go on anyway. At least, different personalities are what the current thing is all about, as far as i know about it, which (luckily?) isnt that much. Bryan Østergaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somehow a lot of people seems to think banning is the only possible solution. I tend to think that's a horrible idea myself and most of devrel backs me up on that. Of course it is a horrible idea, but isnt it better than seeing someone constantly insulting people, instead of being productive, functional, objective or at least polite? At the moment I feel like there is no real reason _not_ to insult anyone, for those who like to do so, which has to be changed or values will be lost completely. It can even be fun to get rid of aggressions collected throughout the week at once, yet the gym is the correct place to do so, not this list. Sincerely, Daniel P.S.: I know I did not read the complete thread, yet I am physically ill at the moment, not able to read it all. [ -- fuel your flame-o-mat with
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 23:07:58 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. Anyone who is impolite get's kicked off. Who defines 'impolite'? It's a cultural thing, and given that we have developers and users from all over the world, we span a lot of vastly different cultures. 2. Anyone who repeatedly and seemingly on purpose tries to harm the discussion will be kicked off. And how do you judge whether someone is deliberately trying to harm the discussion or is just being careless with his wording or generally misguided? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
these are where warnings and apologies come in. plus I think only repeated behavior should result in permanent removal. On 3/5/07, Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 5 Mar 2007 23:07:58 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. Anyone who is impolite get's kicked off. Who defines 'impolite'? It's a cultural thing, and given that we have developers and users from all over the world, we span a lot of vastly different cultures. 2. Anyone who repeatedly and seemingly on purpose tries to harm the discussion will be kicked off. And how do you judge whether someone is deliberately trying to harm the discussion or is just being careless with his wording or generally misguided? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Little respect towards Daniel please
Dear List, 1. Anyone who is impolite get's kicked off. Who defines 'impolite'? It's a cultural thing, and given that we have developers and users from all over the world, we span a lot of vastly different cultures. I am aware of this issue, but it is not needed to solve it at once or perfectly. It would be a starting point to just define the usage of words commonly used for personally attacking someone as impolite (for instance fuck, idiot and so on). The definition should not reference any culture or religion as a codex that is to be followed, and I even think that wouldnt be needed, as the definition is something that could be developed over time. Just try to imagine a flame war without insults, without attacking personally - would it work? I find it hard to imagine, which is why I suggest this as a good point to start with. Of course one could flame by constantly repeating the idea is bad because of several facts. But this is where the 2nd rule is to be applied: 2. Anyone who repeatedly and seemingly on purpose tries to harm the discussion will be kicked off. And how do you judge whether someone is deliberately trying to harm the discussion or is just being careless with his wording or generally misguided? If someone is careless with his wording or generally misguided that often, that it feels like it is done deliberately for the rest, thus for the majority, where is the difference? It annoys people. Yet I of course agree, noone should be kicked for being misguided (being careless can be switched off), and honestly i do not currently have a solution to avoid kicking misguided people that on the other hand does not allow abuse. I will tell you as soon as I have an idea, and until that is the case, I'd like to quote what Caleb Cushing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: these are where warnings and apologies come in. plus I think only repeated behavior should result in permanent removal. If you got to apologize and explain why you where misguided again and again, you might head over to IRC and ask wether you understood it correctly, if it's not on purpose, and if it is, you at least need alot more energy and you have less flexibility of spreading you aggression, insults or whatever. Sincerely, Daniel P.S.: It's nice to see someone pick up a good point and express it. Good to know I am not the only one of that or a similar opinion. Off-Topic at the end: Caleb Cushing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -- OFFTOPIC -- --START FLAME -- how can you write that long of a letter if you can't read and what does a physical illness have to do with reading? --END FLAME-- sorry can't help myself. well, think of a flu and pyrexia - at least I cannot really read a longer time while having one, yet i can think relatively clear for a limited period of time and thus write. Personal experiences may vary :-) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[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] 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
[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
