Re: Can we improve things?
Ar Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 03:06:11PM +1100, ysgrifennodd Jeff Waugh: > > > > But please don't ignore the question I asked: > > > > Who's on the "potential maintainership team" for PGO, so that we may > > inquire them about the progress? > > Sorry, but I'm not going to get caught up in pointless crap like this. Some > folks may think it's okay to treat me differently as a result of attempted > character assassination, but you should know better Federico. What the hell? As a relative outsider these days, I look at emails like this and am completely baffled. Federico asked what looked like a perfectly innocuous question (ie, who will be assisting, covering, taking over, or whatever is on the cards). Why is this "pointless crap"? > The potential co-maintainers > have already had experience doing so, and were asked months ago. I would also like to know who they are. Not because I am trying to be pointlessly crap or to engage in character assassination. It's out of pure curiosity. What's so wrong with just asking "Oh, right, who's that, then?" Telsa ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Can we improve things?
On Sat, 2007-12-15 at 18:38 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > > > You've been asked to be more open, don't get annoyed if people are pissed > > by closed non-answers! > > I'm mostly annoyed at the attitude rather than the questions (even the ones > that have already been answered). I don't really feel an obligation to give > answers to people who have negative intent, which I know many onlookers can > appreciate. I'm writing an email now that will resolve some of these issues, > with the knowledge that nothing will satisfy those who want negativity more > than they want resolution. :-) I'm with Jeff on this one. Even I'm getting frustrated by the attitude of you guys. Planet-gnome is Jeff's project. In order to comply with what people want he's setting up a team of maintainers. That's far more than anybody else has been asked to do. And some of our core modules are more important than planet.gnome.org. Although yes, pgo is now the public face of GNOME. In my opinion Jeff has played an important role in making it become what it has become. With flaws, yes. Just like how I did things wrong while maintaining my projects. Doing things wrong is an art of being human. He's nonetheless willing to do all this and still the attitude here is a negative one. Let me remind people that this is a free software community based on collaboration, friendship and cooperation. Federico at least tried to ask it in a friendly way. If you don't like how Jeff maintains planet.gnome.org, ask the people controlling the domain start a world.gnome.org and maintain it the way you want it maintained. Or wait for Jeff's judgement on the issue and let's see how the maintainers he'll put forward will perform. If that's bad, you can complain just like how you can complain that is being badly maintained. By starting a competitor that works better. You can even fork Jeff's work if you think that's the solution. I have had enough of this mud slinging. It's getting ridiculous, really. A lot of people are showing how unprofessional they are. -- Philip Van Hoof, freelance software developer home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org http://pvanhoof.be/blog http://codeminded.be ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Can we improve things?
On Dec 14, 2007 11:38 PM, Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > You've been asked to be more open, don't get annoyed if people are pissed > > by closed non-answers! > > I'm mostly annoyed at the attitude rather than the questions (even the ones > that have already been answered). I don't really feel an obligation to give > answers to people who have negative intent, which I know many onlookers can > appreciate. I'm writing an email now that will resolve some of these issues, > with the knowledge that nothing will satisfy those who want negativity more > than they want resolution. :-) What is this negative intent? I see people concerned about the maintenance of what has become an important community resource. Like most hackers, they are not satisfied by processes that are not transparent. Whether you mean it or not, that is the impression you are giving. This isn't a personal attack, Jeff. Just normal criticism of the maintainer of a high-profile module. So why do you think that Federico and others "want negativity more than they want resolution" when they are offering to help out directly? It seems to me an awful lot like a contributor trying hard to get his patch accepted by a maintainer who happens to be pretty busy. That being said, I'm glad to hear that you are making progress on this front, and look forward to hearing more details when you have a chance. As someone who over-extends on a regular basis, I'm not particularly bothered by delays. :-) Sandy ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
