[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
George Prowse wrote: Stephen Bennett wrote: I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to get rid of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them. You would certainly make that point. then let the other employee leave and let the employee in question know that it will not be tolerated in the future. Therefore saving the services of one of the best employees (and with it money) and also said employee knows /exactly/ where he stands for the future. It is called man-management and people skills, something that is severely lacking in Gentoo at the moment Mate that's the first time in ages that I've truly agreed with what you've written. I think I need a lie-down ;) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Incidentally, I'm unsure as to how your analogy applies here. You keep mentioning 'best employee'. I'm not sure how that fits in. No, twice he said one of the best employees. Honestly Ciarian, I'd think you of all people would not want to mis-quote someone. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Long wrote: George Prowse wrote: Stephen Bennett wrote: I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to get rid of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them. You would certainly make that point. then let the other employee leave and let the employee in question know that it will not be tolerated in the future. Therefore saving the services of one of the best employees (and with it money) and also said employee knows /exactly/ where he stands for the future. It is called man-management and people skills, something that is severely lacking in Gentoo at the moment Mate that's the first time in ages that I've truly agreed with what you've written. I think I need a lie-down ;) Fortunately some people value integrity above what you call man-management and people skills. Marijn -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF+TZ6p/VmCx0OL2wRAg1eAJ4+p4pAbWFLi3ZfU1GaopGQw/7huQCeLod2 Hdb0PUubrabQ0HkXEnHrY1Q= =YoGb -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Long wrote: George Prowse wrote: Stephen Bennett wrote: I'd rather make it known that that sort of backhanded tactics to get rid of someone you don't like won't work whoever uses them. You would certainly make that point. then let the other employee leave and let the employee in question know that it will not be tolerated in the future. Therefore saving the services of one of the best employees (and with it money) and also said employee knows /exactly/ where he stands for the future. It is called man-management and people skills, something that is severely lacking in Gentoo at the moment Mate that's the first time in ages that I've truly agreed with what you've written. I think I need a lie-down ;) Fortunately some people value integrity above what you call man-management and people skills. Marijn Thats the whole point about why it is lacking: using man management and people skills you can keep your integrity -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Stephen Becker wrote: I would still have told Diego exactly how I felt about unreasonably abusing an arch team member who was simply trying to do his job What by abusing him in turn on bugzilla so it would stay part of the public record? Good game representing gentoo there. And was Diego being so abusive, and using such foul language as you did? (That's rhetorical btw) I would still react loudly to folks pulling a similar stunt now that I *am* retired. Hopefully not in the same manner. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
On 3/15/07, Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen Becker wrote: I would still have told Diego exactly how I felt about unreasonably abusing an arch team member who was simply trying to do his job What by abusing him in turn on bugzilla so it would stay part of the public record? Good game representing gentoo there. And was Diego being so abusive, and using such foul language as you did? (That's rhetorical btw) First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so he got abused in return. I would still react loudly to folks pulling a similar stunt now that I *am* retired. Hopefully not in the same manner. Sometimes people need to be bluntly told to stop screwing up. -Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Stephen Becker napsal(a): First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so he got abused in return. Yeah indeed, lets get the facts straight and let's see who did behave like an asshole: http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=110676action=view I would still react loudly to folks pulling a similar stunt now that I *am* retired. Hopefully not in the same manner. Sometimes people need to be bluntly told to stop screwing up. Indeed, so eroyf was told to stop screwing up, he just didn't get it (apparently neither did you, for that matter). And don't start this 'mips needs more babysitting' nonsense here again, please. -- 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: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
On 3/15/07, Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stephen Becker napsal(a): First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so he got abused in return. Yeah indeed, lets get the facts straight and let's see who did behave like an asshole: http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=110676action=view Indeed both of us were assholes that day, I never denied that. The difference is, Diego was being an asshole to somebody who was merely trying to test packages in a manner consistent with his training as an arch dev. I was being an asshole to Diego for being an asshole. I would still react loudly to folks pulling a similar stunt now that I *am* retired. Hopefully not in the same manner. Sometimes people need to be bluntly told to stop screwing up. Indeed, so eroyf was told to stop screwing up, he just didn't get it (apparently neither did you, for that matter). And don't start this 'mips needs more babysitting' nonsense here again, please. You really need to stop putting words in people's mouths. That makes you an asshole without reason, and now I'm being an asshole to you because you are being an asshole. In other words, shut up and take your bullshit FUD about the mips team out of this discussion, and go wrangle some bugs. -Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Jakub Moc wrote: Stephen Becker napsal(a): First of all, get your facts straight. The bugzilla incident of which you speak happened before all of this. Second of all, the language is irrelevant. Point is, he was acting like an asshole to somebody , so he got abused in return. Yeah indeed, lets get the facts straight and let's see who did behave like an asshole: http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=110676action=view Retiring or not, *any* developer calling another developer a f**khead should be suspended immediately pending an investigation. It would get an instant ban from the forums. Is there a reason why this wasn't done? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
OK, you three. Knock it off. Right now. This is exactly the sort of utter nonsense that we've been talking about viz. what's going on on this mailing list. There is no excuse to be an asshole, Stephen, because in doing so (even as a retaliation) renders your own point null and void. It's one thing to defend a teammate, it's entirely another to display the sort of behavioural issues that you seem intent on doing. George, please take your concerns to DevRel, rather than this list. Steve (long): you've been going on and on in various threads after only half-reading, do you really need to respond to everything, everywhere, every time? The thing is, (this goes for all three of you, at a minimum), just because you *can* speak, does not necessarily mean that you *should*. Thanks, Seemant signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Stephen Becker napsal(a): On 3/15/07, Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah indeed, lets get the facts straight and let's see who did behave like an asshole: http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=110676action=view Indeed both of us were assholes that day, I never denied that. The difference is, Diego was being an asshole to somebody who was merely trying to test packages in a manner consistent with his training as an arch dev. I was being an asshole to Diego for being an asshole. No, Diego asked to not keyword an obsolete KDE meta version ~mips because we all know the history with MIPS keywording and lingering stale crap in portage; also because it's completely unneeded for KDE support on mips and also because it'd create a huge and pointless maintenance overhead for already understaffed KDE team. That definitely doesn't qualify as 'being an asshole', it was a legitimate maintainer's request based on long-term experience with mips team. Indeed, so eroyf was told to stop screwing up, he just didn't get it (apparently neither did you, for that matter). And don't start this 'mips needs more babysitting' nonsense here again, please. You really need to stop putting words in people's mouths. That makes you an asshole without reason, and now I'm being an asshole to you because you are being an asshole. In other words, shut up and take your bullshit FUD about the mips team out of this discussion, and go wrangle some bugs. I'm not putting anything in anyone's mouth, and I'd suggest that you wash your mouth before further posting to this mailing list, your vocabulary is kinda ridiculous. Plus, everyone can read the babysitting history on the relevant keywording bug (yeah if anyone wonders, kdelibs still unkeyworded about 5 months after the bug has been filed). -- 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: Re: gentoo-dev vs lkml?
Both of you please stop this thread right here. It's getting nobody anywhere. Thanks, seemant signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
