Re: [Interest] L Word

[Tuukka Turunen]

Hi,

Functional safety is a complex topic with multiple different standards 
depending upon what you are creating. In essence the needed measures are 
depending upon how likely someone is to get hurt when something goes wrong. The 
need depends upon what is done and typically there are multiple ways to achieve 
what is needed.

Here is a few years old presentation on the topic: https://youtu.be/AaU0OcOKlFk

In the Qt website there is also further info on the topic: 
https://www.qt.io/product/functional-safety-and-qt

Yours,

Tuukka

From: Interest  on behalf of Benjamin TERRIER 

Date: Monday, 3. May 2021 at 19.22
To: eric.fedosej...@gmail.com 
Cc: Qt Interest 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word

Le lun. 3 mai 2021 à 18:03, 
mailto:eric.fedosej...@gmail.com>> a écrit :
So basically open source/standard Qt was considered appropriate for safety 
critical devices prior to the introduction of Safe Renderer in 2017, but now 
only commercial Qt with Safe Renderer is appropriate for that purpose.

Before anyone says otherwise, Qt was widely used in safety critical 
applications before Safe Renderer existed. See for example the text from 
introductory blog post about Safe Renderer:
“Industries such as automotive, medical and industrial automation, where Qt is 
the leading UI framework, can now satisfy safety critical requirements with Qt 
easier than before.”

Qt never came with functional safety guarantee, so if you want to use Qt for 
that you have to audit and certify a specific Qt version (or whatever the 
regulator asks you to do). That's what had to be done before the introduction 
of Qt Safe Renderer, and that is something you can still do.

As the blog post says, the Qt Safe Renderer make it easier to use Qt in 
functional safety products because you only need to have the Qt Safe Renderer 
audited/certified an possibly it is something that TQC already does, removing 
the burden from its clients.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)]

On 5/3/21, 11:40 AM, "Interest on behalf of Matthew Woehlke" 
 wrote:

Isn't it obvious? Once upon a time, before they "lost their way", Qt was
useful to him. He was passionate about *that* Qt and wants it back.

I understand *exactly* how he feels.

I get the frustration.  But I think the world moved, and Qt didn't really have 
a choice.  If you are building for a single OS and single (fixed) hardware, you 
can keep code stable.  How do you do that when you are cross platform and have 
to make changes to support M1 chips in new Macs?

I don't think you can, certainly not for every OS and Qt version that worked 
before.  If you need specific hardware/OS supported longer term, but need 
updates to Qt, Qt has the option of paying for commercial support for that 
configuration.  Seems like a reasonable compromise to me.

Expecting Qt to work for new compilers/OSes, but not break _anything_ doesn't 
seem realistic when even the C++ language itself is changing.

What would you have Qt do differently?

Brett

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Benjamin TERRIER]

Le lun. 3 mai 2021 à 18:03,  a écrit :

> So basically open source/standard Qt was considered appropriate for safety
> critical devices prior to the introduction of Safe Renderer in 2017, but
> now only commercial Qt with Safe Renderer is appropriate for that purpose.
>
>
>
> Before anyone says otherwise, Qt was widely used in safety critical
> applications before Safe Renderer existed. See for example the text from
> introductory blog post about Safe Renderer:
>
> “Industries such as automotive, medical and industrial automation, where
> Qt is the leading UI framework, can now satisfy safety critical
> requirements with Qt easier than before.”
>

Qt never came with functional safety guarantee, so if you want to use Qt
for that you have to audit and certify a specific Qt version (or whatever
the regulator asks you to do). That's what had to be done before the
introduction of Qt Safe Renderer, and that is something you can still do.

As the blog post says, the Qt Safe Renderer make it easier to use Qt in
functional safety products because you only need to have the Qt Safe
Renderer audited/certified an possibly it is something that TQC already
does, removing the burden from its clients.

>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Jason H]

The problem isn't Qt, it's not dashboards or medical. It's all about how you mitigate the risk.

 

I think Qt is fine for dashboards and medical, if the risks are properly managed. I think it is ok that a desktop app does not have the same risk profile as a medical device. What is important from a Qt sales/usage perspective is that you can construct a solution that includes Qt AND mitigates the risks. People ARE using Qt for dashbaords and medical. 

 

I think Roland was big a bit hyperbolic there, but his point was correct that recent decicions of QtCo make Qt less attractive. 

 

 
 

Sent: Monday, May 03, 2021 at 11:23 AM
From: eric.fedosej...@gmail.com
To: "'Benjamin TERRIER'" , "'Bob Hood'" 
Cc: "'Qt Interest'" 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word




I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional safety very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market these days? What are vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?

 

If Qt is no longer appropriate for embedded medical devices, why is it still appropriate for vehicle dashboards?

 


From: Interest  On Behalf Of Benjamin TERRIER
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 11:27 AM
To: Bob Hood 
Cc: Qt Interest 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word


 



 


 



On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:15, Bob Hood <bho...@comcast.net> wrote:




On 4/29/2021 4:02 AM, Bernhard Lindner wrote:
 


Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And it's obviously

not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).



If this statement is true and Roland's statement that TQC actively courted that industry is also true, then it seems to me that he has a valid grievance, regardless of how he presents it.




 



TQC actively courted that industry, but it does not mean that they intended Qt to be part of the functional safety stack.



As a proof to my above statement I bring you the Qt Safe Renderer. It is a commercial product from TQC targeted to functional safety industry, so yes TQC has courted this industry.



However, it also means that Qt itself was never meant to be a part of the functional safety stack and is not supposed to mess with it.



The issue at hand here is not that Roland has a valid grievance or not. At least some of the issues he raised are valid.



The issue is that his emails are numerous and have a very low signal/noise ratio, that he is borderline insulting to anyone who is out of his industry and that in the end it lowers the value users are getting from this mailing list.



And personally I'd add that he is so badly advocating for his grievance that I'd prefer him not to advocate for the points where I agree with him.




___ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest




___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Jérôme Godbout]

I did work for 2 operating room equipment that was using Qt (and consulting for 
another 1). We did not had issue with Qt on this based, yes we had a fixed 
version and the complete testing phase must be roll over for a changed. So you 
keep as little changed as possible when doing maintenance fixes. Major version 
cost a lot into testing and then we allow library and framework to be upgrade 
during those extensive tests phase.

One was even using Qml for the GUI, the consulting one was moving from Widget 
to Qml and the widget only was at a time where Qml was not existing.  I do not 
see the problems, you do have to cover all ground and the tests are exhaustive, 
but that would be true to any gui framework used into that field.

So it’s totally doable, sure those application doesn’t always stay on the 
latest is greatest, they are more the stable one until we do another major rev 
or a problem is found. That kind of make it hard to have to stable requirement 
and have connected devices, this often conflict, so most of those equipment 
stay off the grid for that matter.

I now work into smart city  and IoT cie inside the service division for custom 
client products now. But when the power and lightning of a city is in play, we 
still have to deliver robust infrastructure.

The library can be faulty (they all are to a different degree), but it’s more 
about knowing about it and handling it properly without effect or consequences 
to anybody that matter, if this ain’t a risk to anybody it can be acceptable to 
have something failing as long as it’s detected and the consequence of it has 
no impact. So, it’s all about testing and proper error handling and make sure 
there is no unturned stones.

Jérôme Godbout, B. Ing.

Software / Firmware Team Lead
O: (418) 682-3636 ext.: 114
C: (581) 777-0050
godbo...@dimonoff.com<mailto:godbo...@dimonoff.com>
[signature_1466370744]<https://www.dimonoff.com/>
dimonoff.com<https://www.dimonoff.com/>
1015 Avenue Wilfrid-Pelletier,
Québec, QC G1W 0C4, 4e étage


From: Interest  on behalf of 
eric.fedosej...@gmail.com 
Date: Monday, May 3, 2021 at 11:24 AM
To: 'Benjamin TERRIER' , 'Bob Hood' 
Cc: 'Qt Interest' 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word
I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional safety 
very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market these days? What are 
vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?

If Qt is no longer appropriate for embedded medical devices, why is it still 
appropriate for vehicle dashboards?

From: Interest  On Behalf Of Benjamin TERRIER
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 11:27 AM
To: Bob Hood 
Cc: Qt Interest 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word



On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:15, Bob Hood 
mailto:bho...@comcast.net>> wrote:
On 4/29/2021 4:02 AM, Bernhard Lindner wrote:



Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
it's obviously

not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).

If this statement is true and Roland's statement that TQC actively courted that 
industry is also true, then it seems to me that he has a valid grievance, 
regardless of how he presents it.

TQC actively courted that industry, but it does not mean that they intended Qt 
to be part of the functional safety stack.
As a proof to my above statement I bring you the Qt Safe Renderer. It is a 
commercial product from TQC targeted to functional safety industry, so yes TQC 
has courted this industry.
However, it also means that Qt itself was never meant to be a part of the 
functional safety stack and is not supposed to mess with it.
The issue at hand here is not that Roland has a valid grievance or not. At 
least some of the issues he raised are valid.
The issue is that his emails are numerous and have a very low signal/noise 
ratio, that he is borderline insulting to anyone who is out of his industry and 
that in the end it lowers the value users are getting from this mailing list.
And personally I'd add that he is so badly advocating for his grievance that 
I'd prefer him not to advocate for the points where I agree with him.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[eric.fedosejevs]

So basically open source/standard Qt was considered appropriate for safety 
critical devices prior to the introduction of Safe Renderer in 2017, but now 
only commercial Qt with Safe Renderer is appropriate for that purpose.

 

Before anyone says otherwise, Qt was widely used in safety critical 
applications before Safe Renderer existed. See for example the text from 
introductory blog post about Safe Renderer:

“Industries such as automotive, medical and industrial automation, where Qt is 
the leading UI framework, can now satisfy safety critical requirements with Qt 
easier than before.”

 

From: Benjamin TERRIER  
Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 11:46 AM
To: Matthew Woehlke 
Cc: eric.fedosej...@gmail.com; Qt Interest 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word

 

 

Le lun. 3 mai 2021 à 17:33, Matthew Woehlke mailto:mwoehlke.fl...@gmail.com> > a écrit :

On 03/05/2021 11.23, eric.fedosej...@gmail.com 
<mailto:eric.fedosej...@gmail.com>  wrote:
> I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional 
> safety very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market
> these days? What are vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?

Are they? I thought it was infotainment systems. There's quite the 
difference between those two. (At least in most cars; Teslas I think may 
be starting to blur that distinction, and to an extent that likely 
alarms some people.)

 

Qt is also used for vehicle dashboards.

But yet Qt is not to be used for functional safety.

That's the sole reason for the existence of Qt Safe Render, which is suited for 
functional safety.

 

The idea is that Qt is used to display 3D eye candy, while Qt Safe Render 
displays critical information.

Meaning that if Qt fails/crashes it has 0 consequences to functional safety 
because the Qt Safe Renderer is still displaying what's important for the 
functional safety.

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Benjamin TERRIER]

Le lun. 3 mai 2021 à 17:33, Matthew Woehlke  a
écrit :

> On 03/05/2021 11.23, eric.fedosej...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional
> > safety very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market
> > these days? What are vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?
>
> Are they? I thought it was infotainment systems. There's quite the
> difference between those two. (At least in most cars; Teslas I think may
> be starting to blur that distinction, and to an extent that likely
> alarms some people.)
>

Qt is also used for vehicle dashboards.
But yet Qt is not to be used for functional safety.
That's the sole reason for the existence of Qt Safe Render, which is suited
for functional safety.

The idea is that Qt is used to display 3D eye candy, while Qt Safe Render
displays critical information.
Meaning that if Qt fails/crashes it has 0 consequences to functional safety
because the Qt Safe Renderer is still displaying what's important for the
functional safety.

>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Ilya Diallo]

Le lun. 3 mai 2021 à 17:36, Matthew Woehlke  a
écrit :

> On 29/04/2021 15.24, Ben Haller via Interest wrote:
> > If I'm not mistaken, not a single person has posted to this "L Word"
> > thread in defense of Roland's right to act as he has been acting,
> > have they?
> Given that we live in a culture where anyone doing so is likely to get
> banned right alongside Roland, is that really so surprising?
>
> We live in a world where dissent from certain positions is simply not
> tolerated.
>

Come on. The problem with Roland is not "dissent". It's ad hominem attacks,
disparaging others and shameless advertising.
There's plenty of dissent here otherwise.

Ilya
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[eric.fedosejevs]

Prime billing on QtC's front page is a picture of the combined 
dashboard/infotainment system for the 2019 Mercedes-Benz A-Class.

Dashboard is definitely safety critical in eyes of regulators. Infotainment 
system too if is integrated with backup cam.

-Original Message-
From: Matthew Woehlke  
Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 11:33 AM

On 03/05/2021 11.23, eric.fedosej...@gmail.com wrote:
> I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional 
> safety very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market 
> these days? What are vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?

Are they? I thought it was infotainment systems. There's quite the difference 
between those two. (At least in most cars; Teslas I think may be starting to 
blur that distinction, and to an extent that likely alarms some people.)

Oh, fun story... before it died entirely, my Prius's dashboard would sometimes 
fail completely. The car still *moved*, but I had no idea how fast I was going, 
or how much fuel I had left :-D. Fun times... and an interesting point of 
discussion for whether or not the dashboard is, in fact, "safety critical".

-- 
Matthew

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Matthew Woehlke]

On 30/04/2021 11.20, Jason H wrote:

I have mixed feelings about the whole situation. I think Roland is right, or at
least has a valid point most of the time, even if it is technical or limited to
a specific use case.
[...]
Personally, I don't understand why if he hates it so much he participates the
way he does?


Isn't it obvious? Once upon a time, before they "lost their way", Qt was 
useful to him. He was passionate about *that* Qt and wants it back.


I understand *exactly* how he feels.

--
Matthew
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Matthew Woehlke]

On 29/04/2021 15.24, Ben Haller via Interest wrote:

If I'm not mistaken, not a single person has posted to this "L Word"
thread in defense of Roland's right to act as he has been acting,
have they?
Given that we live in a culture where anyone doing so is likely to get 
banned right alongside Roland, is that really so surprising?


We live in a world where dissent from certain positions is simply not 
tolerated.


--
Matthew
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Matthew Woehlke]

On 03/05/2021 11.23, eric.fedosej...@gmail.com wrote:
I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional 
safety very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market

these days? What are vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?


Are they? I thought it was infotainment systems. There's quite the 
difference between those two. (At least in most cars; Teslas I think may 
be starting to blur that distinction, and to an extent that likely 
alarms some people.)


Oh, fun story... before it died entirely, my Prius's dashboard would 
sometimes fail completely. The car still *moved*, but I had no idea how 
fast I was going, or how much fuel I had left :-D. Fun times... and an 
interesting point of discussion for whether or not the dashboard is, in 
fact, "safety critical".


--
Matthew
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[eric.fedosejevs]

I find this whole argument that Qt is not appropriate for functional safety 
very puzzling. Aren’t vehicle dashboards QtC’s main market these days? What are 
vehicle dashboards if not safety critical?

 

If Qt is no longer appropriate for embedded medical devices, why is it still 
appropriate for vehicle dashboards?

 

From: Interest  On Behalf Of Benjamin TERRIER
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 11:27 AM
To: Bob Hood 
Cc: Qt Interest 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word

 

 

 

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:15, Bob Hood mailto:bho...@comcast.net> > wrote:

On 4/29/2021 4:02 AM, Bernhard Lindner wrote:



Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
it's obviously
not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).


If this statement is true and Roland's statement that TQC actively courted that 
industry is also true, then it seems to me that he has a valid grievance, 
regardless of how he presents it.

 

TQC actively courted that industry, but it does not mean that they intended Qt 
to be part of the functional safety stack.

As a proof to my above statement I bring you the Qt Safe Renderer. It is a 
commercial product from TQC targeted to functional safety industry, so yes TQC 
has courted this industry.

However, it also means that Qt itself was never meant to be a part of the 
functional safety stack and is not supposed to mess with it.

The issue at hand here is not that Roland has a valid grievance or not. At 
least some of the issues he raised are valid.

The issue is that his emails are numerous and have a very low signal/noise 
ratio, that he is borderline insulting to anyone who is out of his industry and 
that in the end it lowers the value users are getting from this mailing list.

And personally I'd add that he is so badly advocating for his grievance that 
I'd prefer him not to advocate for the points where I agree with him.

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Konstantin Shegunov]

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 6:48 PM Robert Hairgrove 
wrote:

> There IS the other forum at https://forum.qt.io/ ...
>
> It has lots of subforums which would seem adequate for off-topic content
> as long as it even remotely concerns Qt.
>
Yes, we are lenient, probably sometimes to a fault, but we have banned
overly disruptive people in the past, albeit not too often. The main
purpose of the forum is for users of Qt to help other users of Qt, much
like this list. We don't get a significant presence from the QtC employees,
however. We have "The lounge" though, you can vent there as much as you
want, as long as you're not actively insulting other people, obviously.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Volker Hilsheimer]

Aren’t there enough other places where subjects that are too off-topic for this 
list can be discussed? Facebook, Twitter, medium, reddit etc. provide ample 
opportunity. I’d at least consider them better places for product-placement :P 
I don’t quite see why the Qt community needs to host a channel for discussions 
that are off-topic for most Qt users.

Nevertheless, honest and constructive discussions, also including some venting, 
about what’s wrong with Qt are welcome here. In particular for technical issues 
there are likely to be people reading list that can do something about it.


Cheers,
Volker


> On 30 Apr 2021, at 17:20, Jason H  wrote:
> 
> Not to Jeffery specifically,
>  
> I have mixed feelings about the whole situation. I think Roland is right, or 
> at least has a valid point most of the time, even if it is technical or 
> limited to a specific use case. However his speech is often hyperbolic, 
> absolutust, and not really tolerant of any other opinion. 
>  
> I think licensing, project direction, and other "soft" discussions ARE 
> appropriate for "qt-interest" mailing list. I don't think the hyperbole is 
> appropriate though.  
>  
> Maybe the answer is another mailing list, "qt-offtopic" or whatever, and we 
> can say that such hyperbole is appropriate there, but not here. I do 
> appreciate the comments that for people looking for a dense, tenchical 
> resource, the hyperbole is diluting. 
>  
> I hope Giuseppe comes back. He's been fantastic. 
>  
> Personally, I don't understand why if he hates it so much he participates the 
> way he does? It seems like ge's mobing away from Qt on his own? I suspect 
> that he probably won't return after the ban.
>  
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 at 10:12 AM
> From: "Jeffrey Brendecke" 
> To: interest@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word
> I, too, am one of those list lurkers looking for interesting information and 
> discussions on Qt, but all too often I instead see posts from one unpleasant 
> person repeatedly dominating discussions with belligerent, non-productive 
> rantings. I wonder why he even uses Qt or even spends time thinking about it.
>  
> Given that there is at least one large development company in the US making 
> money off using Qt on medical devices, among others, I think that this one 
> difficult person is definitely not the sole fountain of knowledge on the 
> subject and should not be given more credence than necessary. If Qt has 
> short-comings in the medical device realm, constructive discussion would 
> bring more than infantile rants. He would have done better to convince the Qt 
> Company to hire him on as a consultant to improve their technology for use on 
> medical devices, as that seems to be something the company wants to be 
> successful in. Instead, I would not want to go anywhere near the guy
>  
> I have experienced Giuseppe D'Angelo as a fabulous, caring instructor and am 
> sorry to see him leave this discussion. All of us are the poorer because of 
> it.
>  
> If any person's postings on this list (or really in any context) are causing 
> excellent contributors like Giuseppe to leave, then that is a very good 
> indication that that person needs to be removed from the list.
>  
> Jeffrey
>  
> -
>  
> On Apr 29, 2021, at 21:30, Rui Oliveira  wrote:
>  
> And so we lost one of the most active, contributing, and knowledgeable 
> members of this mailing list. 
> 
> Cue "the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere" meme. 
> 
> I was thinking of putting him in CC but I don't think I should bother the 
> man. 
> 
> I sure did respect Giuseppe, and I can totally get behind his no-BS 
> personality.
> 
> With wishes of talking about code again,
> Rui
> 
> Às 09:22 de 29/04/2021, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest escreveu:
> On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote: 
> If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't 
> answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology; 
> I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long 
> trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here. 
> 
> No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines for 
> other people, pal. 
> 
> 
> I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true. 
> 
> Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling you a 
> liar. 
> 
> I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase: 
> 
> YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG. 
> 
> Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will. 
> 
> === 
> 
> Where does this leave us, then? 
> 
> At BEST, you

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Robert Hairgrove]

There IS the other forum at https://forum.qt.io/ ...

It has lots of subforums which would seem adequate for off-topic content 
as long as it even remotely concerns Qt.


Bob

--

On 30.04.21 17:20, Jason H wrote:
Maybe the answer is another mailing list, "qt-offtopic" or whatever, 
and we can say that such hyperbole is appropriate there, but not here. 
I do appreciate the comments that for people looking for a dense, 
tenchical resource, the hyperbole is diluting.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Jason H]

Not to Jeffery specifically,

 

I have mixed feelings about the whole situation. I think Roland is right, or at least has a valid point most of the time, even if it is technical or limited to a specific use case. However his speech is often hyperbolic, absolutust, and not really tolerant of any other opinion. 

 

I think licensing, project direction, and other "soft" discussions ARE appropriate for "qt-interest" mailing list. I don't think the hyperbole is appropriate though.  

 

Maybe the answer is another mailing list, "qt-offtopic" or whatever, and we can say that such hyperbole is appropriate there, but not here. I do appreciate the comments that for people looking for a dense, tenchical resource, the hyperbole is diluting. 

 

I hope Giuseppe comes back. He's been fantastic. 

 

Personally, I don't understand why if he hates it so much he participates the way he does? It seems like ge's mobing away from Qt on his own? I suspect that he probably won't return after the ban.

 




Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 at 10:12 AM
From: "Jeffrey Brendecke" 
To: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word


I, too, am one of those list lurkers looking for interesting information and discussions on Qt, but all too often I instead see posts from one unpleasant person repeatedly dominating discussions with belligerent, non-productive rantings. I wonder why he even uses Qt or even spends time thinking about it.
 

Given that there is at least one large development company in the US making money off using Qt on medical devices, among others, I think that this one difficult person is definitely not the sole fountain of knowledge on the subject and should not be given more credence than necessary. If Qt has short-comings in the medical device realm, constructive discussion would bring more than infantile rants. He would have done better to convince the Qt Company to hire him on as a consultant to improve their technology for use on medical devices, as that seems to be something the company wants to be successful in. Instead, I would not want to go anywhere near the guy

 

I have experienced Giuseppe D'Angelo as a fabulous, caring instructor and am sorry to see him leave this discussion. All of us are the poorer because of it.

 

If any person's postings on this list (or really in any context) are causing excellent contributors like Giuseppe to leave, then that is a very good indication that that person needs to be removed from the list.

 

Jeffrey

 

-
 

On Apr 29, 2021, at 21:30, Rui Oliveira <rui...@hotmail.com> wrote:
 


And so we lost one of the most active, contributing, and knowledgeable members of this mailing list. 

Cue "the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere" meme. 

I was thinking of putting him in CC but I don't think I should bother the man. 

I sure did respect Giuseppe, and I can totally get behind his no-BS personality.

With wishes of talking about code again,
Rui

Às 09:22 de 29/04/2021, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest escreveu:

On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote: 

If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't 
answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology; 
I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long 
trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here. 

No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines for other people, pal. 


I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true. 

Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling you a liar. 

I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase: 

YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG. 

Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will. 

=== 

Where does this leave us, then? 

At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory false content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the participants. 

At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since in order to win an argument you: 

* googled some keywords; 
* got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis; 
* didn't even bother to read the contents; 
* pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning the veracity of such explosive statements; 
* when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that direction. 

(...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...) 

Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been true, and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. With such precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument you bring forward? 

=== 

In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here. 

It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or if it exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these behaviours acceptable. 

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Jeffrey Brendecke]

I, too, am one of those list lurkers looking for interesting information and 
discussions on Qt, but all too often I instead see posts from one unpleasant 
person repeatedly dominating discussions with belligerent, non-productive 
rantings. I wonder why he even uses Qt or even spends time thinking about it.

Given that there is at least one large development company in the US making 
money off using Qt on medical devices, among others, I think that this one 
difficult person is definitely not the sole fountain of knowledge on the 
subject and should not be given more credence than necessary. If Qt has 
short-comings in the medical device realm, constructive discussion would bring 
more than infantile rants. He would have done better to convince the Qt Company 
to hire him on as a consultant to improve their technology for use on medical 
devices, as that seems to be something the company wants to be successful in. 
Instead, I would not want to go anywhere near the guy

I have experienced Giuseppe D'Angelo as a fabulous, caring instructor and am 
sorry to see him leave this discussion. All of us are the poorer because of it.

If any person's postings on this list (or really in any context) are causing 
excellent contributors like Giuseppe to leave, then that is a very good 
indication that that person needs to be removed from the list.

Jeffrey

-

> On Apr 29, 2021, at 21:30, Rui Oliveira  wrote:
> 
> And so we lost one of the most active, contributing, and knowledgeable 
> members of this mailing list. 
> 
> Cue "the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere" meme. 
> 
> I was thinking of putting him in CC but I don't think I should bother the 
> man. 
> 
> I sure did respect Giuseppe, and I can totally get behind his no-BS 
> personality.
> 
> With wishes of talking about code again,
> Rui
> 
> Às 09:22 de 29/04/2021, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest escreveu:
>> On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote: 
>>> If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't 
>>> answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology; 
>>> I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long 
>>> trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here. 
>> 
>> No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines for 
>> other people, pal. 
>> 
>> 
>> I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true. 
>> 
>> Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling you a 
>> liar. 
>> 
>> I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase: 
>> 
>> YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG. 
>> 
>> Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will. 
>> 
>> === 
>> 
>> Where does this leave us, then? 
>> 
>> At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory false 
>> content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the participants. 
>> 
>> At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since in 
>> order to win an argument you: 
>> 
>> * googled some keywords; 
>> * got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis; 
>> * didn't even bother to read the contents; 
>> * pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning the 
>> veracity of such explosive statements; 
>> * when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that 
>> direction. 
>> 
>> (...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...) 
>> 
>> Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been true, 
>> and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. With such 
>> precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument you bring 
>> forward? 
>> 
>> === 
>> 
>> In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here. 
>> 
>> It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or if it 
>> exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these behaviours 
>> acceptable. 
>> 
>> I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits 
>> (seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force them to 
>> make a move. 
>> 
>> Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately. 
>> 
>> 
>> You win. Audience claps. Curtains. 
>> 
>> Ad astra per aspera, 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest@qt-project.org 
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest 
>> 
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org 
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest 
> 
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Konstantin Shegunov]

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 1:56 PM Bernhard Lindner <
priv...@bernhard-lindner.de> wrote:

> Agreed. Why not configuring e-mail filters? This is what I would do. This
> is definitely
> better than leaving the list or getting angry and also better than waiting
> for the
> moderators taking actions for years.
>

Well, because ignoring a problem doesn't magically make it go away. Sure,
it's been done, many of us have ignored the mails/threads, but I'd say it
comes a point where you stand your ground. We did draft the CoC for a
reason, and I like that it's not enforced for arbitrarily minor
infractions, but then again, this is not a single instance or a slip, this
has been going on for a time. You could possibly argue that Peppe's
reaction is extreme, or passive-agressive, but the fact of the matter is
that it's also logical. If you push back but it ain't budging, you
typically look for a way around ... and in some sense avoiding a hostile
space (or one you perceive as hostile) is a very valid "way around".

Depends from the point of view. I have never felt insulted by Roland. And I
> can understand
> (and agree) his points many times.


Me neither, and so do I. But this isn't the issue here. The point is that
this isn't a society of two (you and me), but it's a larger group. I am not
into the SJW mentality, however you have to acknowledge the repeated use of
qualifications incompatible with the good tone and spirit of a civil
(technical) discussion. I will not bring in examples, of which there's
plenty, and you did acknowledge that.


> But it explains his frustration. And it explains why there a so few people
> who understand
> his (rudely presented) arguments.
>

I could have an explanation for any unacceptable behaviour without having
to validate it.
Hypothetical example: If, say, a person was abused by their parents, we
could argue it's perfectly understandable why they react violently and
abuse their spouse. This doesn't mean it's an acceptable (or lawful)
behaviour.

If you came from Mars I would surely tolerate much more misbehavior than if
> you came from
> Earth.
>

How much more? Sure, you can allow for some leeway in your decisions, but
sooner or later I'm going to have to face the music if I continue to act
the same way, right?
As always one draws the line somewhere, even if it may not be the same
place for everybody.


> This is a mailing list. People can be filtered and/or ignored on an
> individual basis.
>

You know this, and I know this, because we've been around long enough and
can make an informed decision. A person who just joins the list ordinarily
has little notion of how people are, and who's who. And that's in addition
to the obvious hijacking of the threads and arbitrary insults. When I come
with a question, I wouldn't want to be told that I'm stupid for not having
a "software engineering degree" (which seems rather important for Roland)
or read a book on how great VMS is, I'd rather be guided to a proper
solution for my problem. This is hardly unreasonable to ask, is it?

On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 2:15 PM Ulf Hermann  wrote:

> I would like a new mailing list that focuses on technical aspects, like
> "how do I use Qt in such and such way". Any question of licenses,
> general politics, the importance of functional safety, fruit baskets,
> etc can stay here on the old mailing list.


Agreed, although I acknowledge it's not always easy to disentangle the
questions of licenses and politics from the technical discussion, and these
topics do matter. But as it happens we all have our opinions, I just hope
we can share them as civilized people.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)]

On 4/30/21, 7:06 AM, "Lars Knoll"  wrote:

If he decides to come back after that I do expect that his emails follow 
our CoC and stay on topic for this mailing list. Any further violations will 
lead to a permanent ban.

Thanks, Lars, both for the ban and the explanation.  Sigh of relief from me.

On 4/30/21, 6:36 AM, "Interest on behalf of Bernhard Lindner" 
 
wrote:

Of course the underlying intentions must be constructive anyway - which 
should be
the main question when considering to ban someone.

Do you think Roland's main intentions are destructive?

What is important is _not_ the intention, but the effect on the community.  And 
for me, Roland's "contributions" were destructive.  Roland looks at Qt through 
a lens of embedded safety/regulatory equipment.  I get that and do appreciate 
the perspective.  But he speaks in absolutes.

QML == Awful
Qt == Unstable

New members to the list get the wrong impression when Roland's extreme opinions 
aren't pushed back on.  You've hit a bad place when the choice is ignoring FUD 
vs. fighting a flame-war.  People that force that choice don't deserve to be 
here.

Regards,
Brett

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Ulf Hermann]

If I came from Mars that still wouldn't give me the right to abuse, 
insult or demean other people on this list.


You clearly did not read the secret Martian amendment to the code of 
conduct. Roland has. We're neighbors.


Anyway, the amount of popcorn I have ingested reading this list tells me 
that the time for a nice permanent ban and a fruit basket has come. And 
gone.


I would like a new mailing list that focuses on technical aspects, like 
"how do I use Qt in such and such way". Any question of licenses, 
general politics, the importance of functional safety, fruit baskets, 
etc can stay here on the old mailing list. I will even occasionally read 
it and enjoy my popcorn, but no one interested in more productive 
conversation should be forced to.


best,
Ulf
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Lars Knoll]

Hi all,

After being notified about this whole mess yesterday evening, I’ve now spent 
quite a bit of time to catch up on the whole thread.

The purpose of this mailing list is for users to help each other and discuss Qt 
related topics. The whole thread of postings leading to this is in that respect 
not something that I want to see on this mailing list.

It’s unfortunately not the first time that Roland has been on a trolling 
mission. In this thread, he again has been adding tons of noise to this mailing 
list without adding value. As I see it, this is trolling and destroying the 
value of this list. The tone of the posts is divisive and aggressive, something 
that I don’t want to see in the Qt community.

This means that a lot of the posts in this thread do violate our CoC, and 
Roland has been starting those violations and continuously adding fuel to the 
fire. I understand why Guiseppe has reacted strongly to those posts.

As a project we have so far not defined sanctions when that CoC is being 
violated, as we (fortunately) didn’t really have the need for it so far. That 
puts sanctions at the discretion of the mailing list moderators or myself.

We’ve unfortunately seen this before and I had complaints about his behaviour 
before. As such, Roland is banned from the mailing list until the end of May. 
If he decides to come back after that I do expect that his emails follow our 
CoC and stay on topic for this mailing list. Any further violations will lead 
to a permanent ban.

Lars

On 29 Apr 2021, at 13:45, Tuukka Turunen 
mailto:tuukka.turu...@qt.io>> wrote:

Hi,

Perhaps we have been too long tolerant for the behavior that many see 
problematic (myself included). The challenge is the mix of valid and invalid 
items. It is easier to react to things that are clear violations to our CoC: 
http://quips-qt-io.herokuapp.com/quip-0012-Code-of-Conduct.html and nothing 
else.

On the positive side, we have not had that much of these over the years. We 
have not been banning people regularly, so we also lack a bit of precedence 
with this. Technically it is a trivial thing to remove someone from a mailing 
list. The challenging part is to decide when it is time to do that.

Yours,

Tuukka



From: Interest 
mailto:interest-boun...@qt-project.org>> on 
behalf of Massimiliano Maini mailto:maxma...@gmail.com>>
Date: Thursday, 29. April 2021 at 14.23
To: Bernhard Lindner 
mailto:priv...@bernhard-lindner.de>>
Cc: interest@qt-project.org<mailto:interest@qt-project.org> 
mailto:interest@qt-project.org>>
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word
Yeah, maybe that's part of the problem but, as you said, the solution
should be simple: he leaves the mailing list
or, if that's not possible, the admins "make him leave".

On top, with his ramblings and often totally wrong assertions (the
"April's fool link"-gate scandal has been absolutely
hilarious, almost as the subsequent attempt to regain some
credibility, yeah .. nice try) he has now managed to scare
the hell out of me the next time I'll be tied to a medical device: the
mere chance he may be behind it now makes me
extremely nervous. Even if it's only a blood pressure monitor.

Losing valuable people in the mailing list and, at some point, the
mailing list at all is like throwing away a Ferrari
because a pidgeon keeps shitting on it. I'd argue that getting rid of
the pidgeon is a more sensible solution.

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 12:05, Bernhard Lindner
mailto:priv...@bernhard-lindner.de>> wrote:
>
> The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from a 
> completely
> different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult and 
> a completely
> different from conventional software development. It is particularly 
> different from
> smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with desktop 
> software
> development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A world 
> where
> programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is important. 
> And the law.
> And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and 
> verification and
> validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications. A 
> person who has
> worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland calls 
> this "True
> Software Engineering".
>
> Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
> it's obviously
> not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).
>
> What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list and 
> forget about
> Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't 
> understand why he
> spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt and 
> the reality
> of his industrial s

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Alexey Rusakov]

Hello,

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 13:46, Tuukka Turunen  wrote:

> Perhaps we have been too long tolerant for the behavior that many see
> problematic (myself included). The challenge is the mix of valid and
> invalid items. It is easier to react to things that are clear violations to
> our CoC: http://quips-qt-io.herokuapp.com/quip-0012-Code-of-Conduct.html
> and nothing else.
>

First off, thanks for dropping a line - at least, there's indication that
TQtC is watching, unlike last year when it took much longer before the list
went on complete pre-moderation. Now, having been (and being) a moderator
in other open-source forums, I'm a bit puzzled. There are particular lines
in the CoC that have been very clearly stepped over: "Be considerate", "Be
respectful" and "Be collaborative", among others. From some point, there
was little consideration to and respect for each other in this thread and
especially its predecessor. And what's happening here is very far from
collaboration, let alone being on-topic. Recommendations from the "Get
support from others" part of CoC[1] are also most obviously disregarded.
What kind of clarity do you need to take action, Tuukka? There were
downright personal accusations (false or not - doesn't even matter),
calling names, inflammatory rather than constructive postings, offtopic
here - what else do you need?

[1] http://quips-qt-io.herokuapp.com/quip-0012-Code-of-Conduct.html#id10

Kind regards,
Alexey


>  On the positive side, we have not had that much of these over the years.
> We have not been banning people regularly, so we also lack a bit of
> precedence with this. Technically it is a trivial thing to remove someone
> from a mailing list. The challenging part is to decide when it is time to
> do that.
>
>
>
> Yours,
>
>
>
> Tuukka
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Interest  on behalf of
> Massimiliano Maini 
> *Date: *Thursday, 29. April 2021 at 14.23
> *To: *Bernhard Lindner 
> *Cc: *interest@qt-project.org 
> *Subject: *Re: [Interest] L Word
>
> Yeah, maybe that's part of the problem but, as you said, the solution
> should be simple: he leaves the mailing list
> or, if that's not possible, the admins "make him leave".
>
> On top, with his ramblings and often totally wrong assertions (the
> "April's fool link"-gate scandal has been absolutely
> hilarious, almost as the subsequent attempt to regain some
> credibility, yeah .. nice try) he has now managed to scare
> the hell out of me the next time I'll be tied to a medical device: the
> mere chance he may be behind it now makes me
> extremely nervous. Even if it's only a blood pressure monitor.
>
> Losing valuable people in the mailing list and, at some point, the
> mailing list at all is like throwing away a Ferrari
> because a pidgeon keeps shitting on it. I'd argue that getting rid of
> the pidgeon is a more sensible solution.
>
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 12:05, Bernhard Lindner
>  wrote:
> >
> > The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from
> a completely
> > different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult
> and a completely
> > different from conventional software development. It is particularly
> different from
> > smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with
> desktop software
> > development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A
> world where
> > programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is
> important. And the law.
> > And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and
> verification and
> > validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications.
> A person who has
> > worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland
> calls this "True
> > Software Engineering".
> >
> > Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering.
> And it's obviously
> > not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it
> seriously).
> >
> > What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing
> list and forget about
> > Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't
> understand why he
> > spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt
> and the reality
> > of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to
> influence Qt's
> > strategy a long time ago.
> >
> > (Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with
> Qt).
> >
> > So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going?
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
&g

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Bernhard Lindner]

> > Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.
> 
> I do hope you reconsider, it's going to be a loss for you, but much bigger 
> loss for us.

Agreed. Why not configuring e-mail filters? This is what I would do. This is 
definitely
better than leaving the list or getting angry and also better than waiting for 
the
moderators taking actions for years.

> > The main problem isn't trolling.
> 
> Actually it is.

Depends from the point of view. I have never felt insulted by Roland. And I can 
understand
(and agree) his points many times. 

Still I would never write e-mails in his style and I wish he would drop those 
borderline
insults.

Actually my biggest problem with his posts are their length and the slangy 
language (both
makes reading his mails hard for a non-native speaker like me). 

> > The main problem is: Roland comes from a completely
> > different world. The world of functional safety.
> 
> If I came from Mars that still wouldn't give me the right to abuse, insult or 
> demean
> other people on this list.

But it explains his frustration. And it explains why there a so few people who 
understand
his (rudely presented) arguments.

If you came from Mars I would surely tolerate much more misbehavior than if you 
came from
Earth.

Also don't forget that fights always need two persons: One person who provokes 
and someone
else who volunteers to escalate the situation. As much as I can't understand 
Rolands style
of speech I also can't understand people fighting back in the same style and 
then
complaining about Roland.

This is a mailing list. People can be filtered and/or ignored on an individual 
basis.

-- 
Best Regards,
Bernhard Lindner

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Konstantin Shegunov]

Ronald -> Roland

Sorry about the typo.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Rui Oliveira]

And so we lost one of the most active, contributing, and knowledgeable 
members of this mailing list.


Cue "the worst trade deal maybe ever signed anywhere" meme.

I was thinking of putting him in CC but I don't think I should bother 
the man.


I sure did respect Giuseppe, and I can totally get behind his no-BS 
personality.


With wishes of talking about code again,
Rui

Às 09:22 de 29/04/2021, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest escreveu:

On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote:

If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't
answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology;
I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long
trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here.


No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines 
for other people, pal.



I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be 
true.


Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling 
you a liar.


I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase:

YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG.

Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will.

===

Where does this leave us, then?

At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory 
false content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the 
participants.


At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since 
in order to win an argument you:


* googled some keywords;
* got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis;
* didn't even bother to read the contents;
* pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning 
the veracity of such explosive statements;
* when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that 
direction.


(...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...)

Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been 
true, and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. 
With such precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument 
you bring forward?


===

In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here.

It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or 
if it exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these 
behaviours acceptable.


I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits 
(seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force 
them to make a move.


Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.


You win. Audience claps. Curtains.

Ad astra per aspera,

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Ben Haller via Interest]

+1.

I am mostly a lurker on this list, but I have asked a few questions and 
learned a bunch of things.  I would like to remain subscribed to it; it 
is useful to me.  But Roland is destroying the list.  As Benjamin writes 
below, at least some of the issues Roland raises are valid, and the 
larger discussion (what is Qt for, what should the future of it be, how 
are its licensing terms affecting its usability, etc.) has often been 
interesting.  I have even learned things from Roland's posts, in fact. 
The problem is not Roland's viewpoint as such (although I agree with 
those who are puzzled that he doesn't simply leave the group, since Qt 
is clearly not the tool he wants it to be), nor the discussion topic, 
but the fact that Roland behaves like a troll: posting endlessly making 
essentially the same points over and over, being rude and insulting 
rather than constructive, and attempting not just to make his point, but 
to completely dominate the conversation.


That is unacceptable behavior, and if it isn't against the CoC, perhaps 
it should be.  Tuukka, I recognize the difficult position here, but I 
vote that something needs to be done.  If you don't want to ban someone 
who is not in clear violation of the CoC, then the CoC should be revised 
to disallow this type of behavior.  This needs to stop.  People who are 
good, constructive contributors to the list are leaving, and I will soon 
follow them if this doesn't change.  If I'm not mistaken, not a single 
person has posted to this "L Word" thread in defense of Roland's right 
to act as he has been acting, have they?  It feels like the community is 
pretty much unanimous on this (except, of course, Roland): it needs to 
stop.  It seems clear that it won't stop of Roland's own volition, so 
the moderators need to act.


Cheers,
-B.

Benjamin C. Haller
Messer Lab
Cornell University



Benjamin TERRIER wrote on 4/29/21 11:26 AM:



On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:15, Bob Hood > wrote:


On 4/29/2021 4:02 AM, Bernhard Lindner wrote:

Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
it's obviously
not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).


If this statement is true /and/ Roland's statement that TQC
actively courted that industry is also true, then it seems to me
that he has a valid grievance, regardless of how he presents it.


TQC actively courted that industry, but it does not mean that they 
intended Qt to be part of the functional safety stack.


As a proof to my above statement I bring you the Qt Safe Renderer. It 
is a commercial product from TQC targeted to functional safety 
industry, so yes TQC has courted this industry.
However, it also means that Qt itself was never meant to be a part of 
the functional safety stack and is not supposed to mess with it.


The issue at hand here is not that Roland has a valid grievance or 
not. At least some of the issues he raised are valid.
The issue is that his emails are numerous and have a very low 
signal/noise ratio, that he is borderline insulting to anyone who is 
out of his industry and that in the end it lowers the value users are 
getting from this mailing list.


And personally I'd add that he is so badly advocating for his 
grievance that I'd prefer him not to advocate for the points where I 
agree with him.



___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Konstantin Shegunov]

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:27 AM Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest <
interest@qt-project.org> wrote:

> I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits
> (seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force them
> to make a move.


Well, us "script kiddies"* don't live under a rock, I'm rather convinced
Roland knows rather well how distasteful this statement is, not to mention
the probability of it being an empty threat ... which makes it even worse.
USA law is not directly applicable to EU citizens, and also general
compensation for law expenses don't apply as in the EU legal system. If he
had any intention of perusing such a lawsuit it'd need to be under the
jurisdiction of a court overseeing the place where the supposed offence had
happened. Also he would need to hire a layer who is versed in french law
and (probably) works on site. And to pile on, libel is a hard thing to
prove, as in many jurisdictions it requires proving malice and/or intent
(like in mine). All in all I'd consider this one very Ronald in character:
first have a speech, and another, then if that doesn't work (i.e. you get
ignored or challenged) insult somebody, if insulting somebody doesn't work
threaten something or someone. That's the very definition of how trolling
works and what it is, as you'd duly noted. So, as usual, if a troll
couldn't provoke someone then it escalates ...

* which Roland has used on multiple occasions to refer to people
frequenting this list, and in general to assert his "superior ways". I have
an email from the list sent by him dating back to 2016 where this
particular expression had been used.

Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.
>

I do hope you reconsider, it's going to be a loss for you, but much bigger
loss for us.

You win. Audience claps. Curtains.
>

Yeah ... except that nobody claps ...

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 1:05 PM Bernhard Lindner <
priv...@bernhard-lindner.de> wrote:

> The main problem isn't trolling.


Actually it is.

The main problem is: Roland comes from a completely
> different world. The world of functional safety.


If I came from Mars that still wouldn't give me the right to abuse, insult
or demean other people on this list.

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 2:48 PM Tuukka Turunen  wrote:

>  Technically it is a trivial thing to remove someone from a mailing list.
> The challenging part is to decide when it is time to do that.
>

Well, my personal opinion is that the time had come some time ago.
Nonetheless, this issue festered over the years, and also not without some
fault of us (the users of said list). Many of just ignored the ramblings of
said person without a challenge to the turn of phrase or behaviour (the
"Ronald filters" is one such example). I must confess somewhat ashamedly, I
was relieved as he disappeared for some time, so I thought he'd finally
left. But apparently not ...

I second the request for Roland to be removed from the list, preferably
forever.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Bernhard Lindner]

> The other part of the problem is that he doesn't come from the world of 
> well-adjusted,
> well-behaved people. This could answer your question.

Well, I have met a lot of such people in my life. Such people tend to think 
different
and/or critical and/or they are straight, which is something I like and that 
can be very
useful. Of course the underlying intentions must be constructive anyway - which 
should be
the main question when considering to ban someone.

Do you think Roland's main intentions are destructive?

-- 
Best Regards,
Bernhard Lindner

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Scott Bloom]

In all seriousness, Roland does bring up many valid points, however they are 
often lost due to the demeanor use to present them.

I do think if qt had a qt-med-interest or qt-fusa-interest where the needs of 
medical device deverlopers or functional safety developers was the primary 
concern, his views would likely be less obscure and more in the majority.

Scott

From: Interest  On Behalf Of Ilya Diallo
Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 06:04
To: Tuukka Turunen 
Cc: interest@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word

Easy solution: create the rol...@qt-projet.org<mailto:rol...@qt-projet.org> 
list and send him and his (surely numerous) followers there.
Think "separation of concerns" rather than "ban"

Le jeu. 29 avr. 2021 à 13:46, Tuukka Turunen 
mailto:tuukka.turu...@qt.io>> a écrit :
Hi,

Perhaps we have been too long tolerant for the behavior that many see 
problematic (myself included). The challenge is the mix of valid and invalid 
items. It is easier to react to things that are clear violations to our CoC: 
http://quips-qt-io.herokuapp.com/quip-0012-Code-of-Conduct.html and nothing 
else.

On the positive side, we have not had that much of these over the years. We 
have not been banning people regularly, so we also lack a bit of precedence 
with this. Technically it is a trivial thing to remove someone from a mailing 
list. The challenging part is to decide when it is time to do that.

Yours,

Tuukka



From: Interest 
mailto:interest-boun...@qt-project.org>> on 
behalf of Massimiliano Maini mailto:maxma...@gmail.com>>
Date: Thursday, 29. April 2021 at 14.23
To: Bernhard Lindner 
mailto:priv...@bernhard-lindner.de>>
Cc: interest@qt-project.org<mailto:interest@qt-project.org> 
mailto:interest@qt-project.org>>
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word
Yeah, maybe that's part of the problem but, as you said, the solution
should be simple: he leaves the mailing list
or, if that's not possible, the admins "make him leave".

On top, with his ramblings and often totally wrong assertions (the
"April's fool link"-gate scandal has been absolutely
hilarious, almost as the subsequent attempt to regain some
credibility, yeah .. nice try) he has now managed to scare
the hell out of me the next time I'll be tied to a medical device: the
mere chance he may be behind it now makes me
extremely nervous. Even if it's only a blood pressure monitor.

Losing valuable people in the mailing list and, at some point, the
mailing list at all is like throwing away a Ferrari
because a pidgeon keeps shitting on it. I'd argue that getting rid of
the pidgeon is a more sensible solution.

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 12:05, Bernhard Lindner
mailto:priv...@bernhard-lindner.de>> wrote:
>
> The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from a 
> completely
> different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult and 
> a completely
> different from conventional software development. It is particularly 
> different from
> smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with desktop 
> software
> development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A world 
> where
> programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is important. 
> And the law.
> And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and 
> verification and
> validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications. A 
> person who has
> worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland calls 
> this "True
> Software Engineering".
>
> Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
> it's obviously
> not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).
>
> What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list and 
> forget about
> Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't 
> understand why he
> spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt and 
> the reality
> of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to 
> influence Qt's
> strategy a long time ago.
>
> (Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with Qt).
>
> So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going?
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Bernhard Lindner
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org>
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org>
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org<mailto:Interest@qt-project.org>
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Benjamin TERRIER]

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:15, Bob Hood  wrote:

> On 4/29/2021 4:02 AM, Bernhard Lindner wrote:
>
> Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
> it's obviously
> not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).
>
>
> If this statement is true *and* Roland's statement that TQC actively
> courted that industry is also true, then it seems to me that he has a valid
> grievance, regardless of how he presents it.
>

TQC actively courted that industry, but it does not mean that they intended
Qt to be part of the functional safety stack.

As a proof to my above statement I bring you the Qt Safe Renderer. It is a
commercial product from TQC targeted to functional safety industry, so yes
TQC has courted this industry.
However, it also means that Qt itself was never meant to be a part of the
functional safety stack and is not supposed to mess with it.

The issue at hand here is not that Roland has a valid grievance or not. At
least some of the issues he raised are valid.
The issue is that his emails are numerous and have a very low signal/noise
ratio, that he is borderline insulting to anyone who is out of his industry
and that in the end it lowers the value users are getting from this mailing
list.

And personally I'd add that he is so badly advocating for his grievance
that I'd prefer him not to advocate for the points where I agree with him.
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Bob Hood]

On 4/29/2021 4:02 AM, Bernhard Lindner wrote:

Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
it's obviously
not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).


If this statement is true /and/ Roland's statement that TQC actively courted 
that industry is also true, then it seems to me that he has a valid grievance, 
regardless of how he presents it.


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Ilya Diallo]

Easy solution: create the rol...@qt-projet.org list and send him and his
(surely numerous) followers there.
Think "separation of concerns" rather than "ban"

Le jeu. 29 avr. 2021 à 13:46, Tuukka Turunen  a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Perhaps we have been too long tolerant for the behavior that many see
> problematic (myself included). The challenge is the mix of valid and
> invalid items. It is easier to react to things that are clear violations to
> our CoC: http://quips-qt-io.herokuapp.com/quip-0012-Code-of-Conduct.html
> and nothing else.
>
>
>
> On the positive side, we have not had that much of these over the years.
> We have not been banning people regularly, so we also lack a bit of
> precedence with this. Technically it is a trivial thing to remove someone
> from a mailing list. The challenging part is to decide when it is time to
> do that.
>
>
>
> Yours,
>
>
>
> Tuukka
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Interest  on behalf of
> Massimiliano Maini 
> *Date: *Thursday, 29. April 2021 at 14.23
> *To: *Bernhard Lindner 
> *Cc: *interest@qt-project.org 
> *Subject: *Re: [Interest] L Word
>
> Yeah, maybe that's part of the problem but, as you said, the solution
> should be simple: he leaves the mailing list
> or, if that's not possible, the admins "make him leave".
>
> On top, with his ramblings and often totally wrong assertions (the
> "April's fool link"-gate scandal has been absolutely
> hilarious, almost as the subsequent attempt to regain some
> credibility, yeah .. nice try) he has now managed to scare
> the hell out of me the next time I'll be tied to a medical device: the
> mere chance he may be behind it now makes me
> extremely nervous. Even if it's only a blood pressure monitor.
>
> Losing valuable people in the mailing list and, at some point, the
> mailing list at all is like throwing away a Ferrari
> because a pidgeon keeps shitting on it. I'd argue that getting rid of
> the pidgeon is a more sensible solution.
>
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 12:05, Bernhard Lindner
>  wrote:
> >
> > The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from
> a completely
> > different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult
> and a completely
> > different from conventional software development. It is particularly
> different from
> > smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with
> desktop software
> > development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A
> world where
> > programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is
> important. And the law.
> > And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and
> verification and
> > validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications.
> A person who has
> > worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland
> calls this "True
> > Software Engineering".
> >
> > Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering.
> And it's obviously
> > not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it
> seriously).
> >
> > What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing
> list and forget about
> > Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't
> understand why he
> > spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt
> and the reality
> > of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to
> influence Qt's
> > strategy a long time ago.
> >
> > (Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with
> Qt).
> >
> > So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going?
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards,
> > Bernhard Lindner
> >
> > ___
> > Interest mailing list
> > Interest@qt-project.org
> > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Tuukka Turunen]

Hi,

Perhaps we have been too long tolerant for the behavior that many see 
problematic (myself included). The challenge is the mix of valid and invalid 
items. It is easier to react to things that are clear violations to our CoC: 
http://quips-qt-io.herokuapp.com/quip-0012-Code-of-Conduct.html and nothing 
else.

On the positive side, we have not had that much of these over the years. We 
have not been banning people regularly, so we also lack a bit of precedence 
with this. Technically it is a trivial thing to remove someone from a mailing 
list. The challenging part is to decide when it is time to do that.

Yours,

Tuukka



From: Interest  on behalf of Massimiliano 
Maini 
Date: Thursday, 29. April 2021 at 14.23
To: Bernhard Lindner 
Cc: interest@qt-project.org 
Subject: Re: [Interest] L Word
Yeah, maybe that's part of the problem but, as you said, the solution
should be simple: he leaves the mailing list
or, if that's not possible, the admins "make him leave".

On top, with his ramblings and often totally wrong assertions (the
"April's fool link"-gate scandal has been absolutely
hilarious, almost as the subsequent attempt to regain some
credibility, yeah .. nice try) he has now managed to scare
the hell out of me the next time I'll be tied to a medical device: the
mere chance he may be behind it now makes me
extremely nervous. Even if it's only a blood pressure monitor.

Losing valuable people in the mailing list and, at some point, the
mailing list at all is like throwing away a Ferrari
because a pidgeon keeps shitting on it. I'd argue that getting rid of
the pidgeon is a more sensible solution.

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 12:05, Bernhard Lindner
 wrote:
>
> The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from a 
> completely
> different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult and 
> a completely
> different from conventional software development. It is particularly 
> different from
> smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with desktop 
> software
> development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A world 
> where
> programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is important. 
> And the law.
> And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and 
> verification and
> validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications. A 
> person who has
> worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland calls 
> this "True
> Software Engineering".
>
> Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
> it's obviously
> not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).
>
> What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list and 
> forget about
> Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't 
> understand why he
> spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt and 
> the reality
> of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to 
> influence Qt's
> strategy a long time ago.
>
> (Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with Qt).
>
> So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going?
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Bernhard Lindner
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Massimiliano Maini]

Yeah, maybe that's part of the problem but, as you said, the solution
should be simple: he leaves the mailing list
or, if that's not possible, the admins "make him leave".

On top, with his ramblings and often totally wrong assertions (the
"April's fool link"-gate scandal has been absolutely
hilarious, almost as the subsequent attempt to regain some
credibility, yeah .. nice try) he has now managed to scare
the hell out of me the next time I'll be tied to a medical device: the
mere chance he may be behind it now makes me
extremely nervous. Even if it's only a blood pressure monitor.

Losing valuable people in the mailing list and, at some point, the
mailing list at all is like throwing away a Ferrari
because a pidgeon keeps shitting on it. I'd argue that getting rid of
the pidgeon is a more sensible solution.

On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 12:05, Bernhard Lindner
 wrote:
>
> The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from a 
> completely
> different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult and 
> a completely
> different from conventional software development. It is particularly 
> different from
> smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with desktop 
> software
> development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A world 
> where
> programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is important. 
> And the law.
> And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and 
> verification and
> validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications. A 
> person who has
> worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland calls 
> this "True
> Software Engineering".
>
> Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
> it's obviously
> not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).
>
> What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list and 
> forget about
> Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't 
> understand why he
> spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt and 
> the reality
> of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to 
> influence Qt's
> strategy a long time ago.
>
> (Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with Qt).
>
> So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going?
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Bernhard Lindner
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Ilya Diallo]

The other part of the problem is that he doesn't come from the world of
well-adjusted, well-behaved people. This could answer your question.

Le jeu. 29 avr. 2021 à 12:05, Bernhard Lindner 
a écrit :

> The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from a
> completely
> different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult
> and a completely
> different from conventional software development. It is particularly
> different from
> smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with
> desktop software
> development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A world
> where
> programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is
> important. And the law.
> And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and
> verification and
> validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications. A
> person who has
> worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland
> calls this "True
> Software Engineering".
>
> Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering.
> And it's obviously
> not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).
>
> What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list
> and forget about
> Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't
> understand why he
> spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt
> and the reality
> of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to
> influence Qt's
> strategy a long time ago.
>
> (Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with Qt).
>
> So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going?
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Bernhard Lindner
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[coroberti]

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 1:05 PM Bernhard Lindner
 wrote:

> What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list and 
> forget about
> Qt.

IMHO, it's a business model.

Distribute the links to your books and your web-site,
and hopefully, sell the books and/or find new customers.

BRGS,
Robert
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Bernhard Lindner]

The main problem isn't trolling. The main problem is: Roland comes from a 
completely
different world. The world of functional safety. This world is difficult and a 
completely
different from conventional software development. It is particularly different 
from
smartphone and web development. And it doesn't have much to do with desktop 
software
development. I have also been in this world for more than 3 years. A world where
programming is the least important thing. Where documentation is important. And 
the law.
And prison. And accuracy and multi-level tests and reliability and verification 
and
validation and standards. And many years of support. And certifications. A 
person who has
worked in this world for a long time has different priorities. Roland calls 
this "True
Software Engineering".

Obviously, Qt has nothing to do with this type of software engineering. And 
it's obviously
not suitable for functional safety (at least not if you take it seriously).

What I don't understand is why Roland doesn't just leave the mailing list and 
forget about
Qt. Qt is not suitable for use in his industrial sector, so I can't understand 
why he
spends so much time writing about the conflict between the reality of Qt and 
the reality
of his industrial sector. If I were him, I would have given up trying to 
influence Qt's
strategy a long time ago.

(Actually, I'm about to give up my hopes for desktop development with Qt). 

So, Roland, why are you keeping the conflicts going? 

-- 
Best Regards,
Bernhard Lindner

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Robert Buchinger]

Most time just reader here, but it's sad to see that one person has a lot of fun destroying a mailing list. "congrats" on this, Troll.Br /RAm 29.04.2021 10:41 schrieb Filip Piechocki :I totally agree with you, Guiseppe.I am subscribed to this list for a long time as it happened several times in the past that the issues I was facing with Qt were already solved here.But the list became more of a Roland's trolling sandbox, where he is throwing sand in others' eyes and having great fun of that, with less and less useful content in this list over time. I think that more and more people get tired of those endless rants and just go somewhere else.So do I.FOn Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:27 AM Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest  wrote:On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote:
> If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't
> answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology;
> I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long
> trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here.

No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines 
for other people, pal.


I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true.

Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling 
you a liar.

I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase:

YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG.

Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will.

===

Where does this leave us, then?

At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory 
false content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the 
participants.

At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since 
in order to win an argument you:

* googled some keywords;
* got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis;
* didn't even bother to read the contents;
* pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning 
the veracity of such explosive statements;
* when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that 
direction.

(...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...)

Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been 
true, and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. With 
such precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument you 
bring forward?

===

In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here.

It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or if 
it exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these 
behaviours acceptable.

I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits 
(seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force them 
to make a move.

Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.


You win. Audience claps. Curtains.

Ad astra per aspera,
-- 
Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Christoph Cullmann]

On 2021-04-29 11:45, Nuno Santos wrote:

+1


+1




On 29 Apr 2021, at 10:37, Florian Bruhin  wrote:

Hey everyone,

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 12:13:13PM +0300, coroberti wrote:

Dear Guiseppe,
You were very helpful for the list members and personally to me.
The list will deteriorate without you.

Sincerely hope that the moderator will start to function and to do 
something.


Note, that for Roland it's a pure business - spread links and sell
books, support, perhaps projects etc.
This is what is expected to be stopped by moderation.

Hope, you will reconsider dropping the list. Thanks.


I've been quiet on this so far, but I can only echo this sentiment.

The signal-to-noise ratio on this list is abysmal since Roland showed 
up
with his rants - by not banning him, list admins here allow an 
otherwise

well-working community medium to be destroyed.

I'm sure many people who've made significant useful contributions to
this mailinglist have already left, and more will follow if nothing 
gets

done about this. If you allow unhealthy community members to continue
with their behaviour, over time, the healthy ones will leave. That's 
not

something admins on this list should be okay with.

Florian

--
   m...@the-compiler.org | https://www.qutebrowser.org
  https://bruhin.software/ | 
https://github.com/sponsors/The-Compiler/

  GPG: 916E B0C8 FD55 A072 | https://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc
I love long mails! | https://email.is-not-s.ms/
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest


___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest


--
Ignorance is bliss...
https://cullmann.io | https://kate-editor.org
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Nuno Santos]

+1

> On 29 Apr 2021, at 10:37, Florian Bruhin  wrote:
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 12:13:13PM +0300, coroberti wrote:
>> Dear Guiseppe,
>> You were very helpful for the list members and personally to me.
>> The list will deteriorate without you.
>> 
>> Sincerely hope that the moderator will start to function and to do something.
>> 
>> Note, that for Roland it's a pure business - spread links and sell
>> books, support, perhaps projects etc.
>> This is what is expected to be stopped by moderation.
>> 
>> Hope, you will reconsider dropping the list. Thanks.
> 
> I've been quiet on this so far, but I can only echo this sentiment.
> 
> The signal-to-noise ratio on this list is abysmal since Roland showed up
> with his rants - by not banning him, list admins here allow an otherwise
> well-working community medium to be destroyed.
> 
> I'm sure many people who've made significant useful contributions to
> this mailinglist have already left, and more will follow if nothing gets
> done about this. If you allow unhealthy community members to continue
> with their behaviour, over time, the healthy ones will leave. That's not
> something admins on this list should be okay with.
> 
> Florian
> 
> -- 
>m...@the-compiler.org | https://www.qutebrowser.org 
>   https://bruhin.software/ | https://github.com/sponsors/The-Compiler/
>   GPG: 916E B0C8 FD55 A072 | https://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc
> I love long mails! | https://email.is-not-s.ms/
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Florian Bruhin]

Hey everyone,

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 12:13:13PM +0300, coroberti wrote:
> Dear Guiseppe,
> You were very helpful for the list members and personally to me.
> The list will deteriorate without you.
> 
> Sincerely hope that the moderator will start to function and to do something.
> 
> Note, that for Roland it's a pure business - spread links and sell
> books, support, perhaps projects etc.
> This is what is expected to be stopped by moderation.
> 
> Hope, you will reconsider dropping the list. Thanks.

I've been quiet on this so far, but I can only echo this sentiment.

The signal-to-noise ratio on this list is abysmal since Roland showed up
with his rants - by not banning him, list admins here allow an otherwise
well-working community medium to be destroyed.

I'm sure many people who've made significant useful contributions to
this mailinglist have already left, and more will follow if nothing gets
done about this. If you allow unhealthy community members to continue
with their behaviour, over time, the healthy ones will leave. That's not
something admins on this list should be okay with.

Florian

-- 
m...@the-compiler.org | https://www.qutebrowser.org 
   https://bruhin.software/ | https://github.com/sponsors/The-Compiler/
   GPG: 916E B0C8 FD55 A072 | https://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc
 I love long mails! | https://email.is-not-s.ms/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[coroberti]

Dear Guiseppe,
You were very helpful for the list members and personally to me.
The list will deteriorate without you.

Sincerely hope that the moderator will start to function and to do something.

Note, that for Roland it's a pure business - spread links and sell
books, support, perhaps projects etc.
This is what is expected to be stopped by moderation.

Hope, you will reconsider dropping the list. Thanks.

Kind regards,
Robert Iakobashvili


On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:43 AM Filip Piechocki  wrote:
>
> I totally agree with you, Guiseppe.
>
> I am subscribed to this list for a long time as it happened several times in 
> the past that the issues I was facing with Qt were already solved here.
> But the list became more of a Roland's trolling sandbox, where he is throwing 
> sand in others' eyes and having great fun of that, with less and less useful 
> content in this list over time. I think that more and more people get tired 
> of those endless rants and just go somewhere else.
>
> So do I.
>
> F
>
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:27 AM Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest 
>  wrote:
>>
>> On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote:
>> > If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't
>> > answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology;
>> > I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long
>> > trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here.
>>
>> No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines
>> for other people, pal.
>>
>>
>> I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true.
>>
>> Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling
>> you a liar.
>>
>> I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase:
>>
>> YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG.
>>
>> Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will.
>>
>> ===
>>
>> Where does this leave us, then?
>>
>> At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory
>> false content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the
>> participants.
>>
>> At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since
>> in order to win an argument you:
>>
>> * googled some keywords;
>> * got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis;
>> * didn't even bother to read the contents;
>> * pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning
>> the veracity of such explosive statements;
>> * when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that
>> direction.
>>
>> (...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...)
>>
>> Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been
>> true, and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. With
>> such precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument you
>> bring forward?
>>
>> ===
>>
>> In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here.
>>
>> It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or if
>> it exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these
>> behaviours acceptable.
>>
>> I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits
>> (seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force them
>> to make a move.
>>
>> Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.
>>
>>
>> You win. Audience claps. Curtains.
>>
>> Ad astra per aspera,
>> --
>> Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
>> KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
>> Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
>> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
>>
>> ___
>> Interest mailing list
>> Interest@qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Filip Piechocki]

I totally agree with you, Guiseppe.

I am subscribed to this list for a long time as it happened several times
in the past that the issues I was facing with Qt were already solved here.
But the list became more of a Roland's trolling sandbox, where he is
throwing sand in others' eyes and having great fun of that, with less and
less useful content in this list over time. I think that more and more
people get tired of those endless rants and just go somewhere else.

So do I.

F

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:27 AM Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest <
interest@qt-project.org> wrote:

> On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote:
> > If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't
> > answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology;
> > I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long
> > trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here.
>
> No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines
> for other people, pal.
>
>
> I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true.
>
> Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling
> you a liar.
>
> I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase:
>
> YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG.
>
> Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will.
>
> ===
>
> Where does this leave us, then?
>
> At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory
> false content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the
> participants.
>
> At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since
> in order to win an argument you:
>
> * googled some keywords;
> * got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis;
> * didn't even bother to read the contents;
> * pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning
> the veracity of such explosive statements;
> * when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that
> direction.
>
> (...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...)
>
> Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been
> true, and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. With
> such precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument you
> bring forward?
>
> ===
>
> In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here.
>
> It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or if
> it exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these
> behaviours acceptable.
>
> I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits
> (seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force them
> to make a move.
>
> Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.
>
>
> You win. Audience claps. Curtains.
>
> Ad astra per aspera,
> --
> Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
> KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
> Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
> KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts
>
> ___
> Interest mailing list
> Interest@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
>
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest]

On 29/04/2021 00:42, Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote:

If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't
answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology;
I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long
trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here.


No reply. Yes, you're not the only one who can set arbitrary deadlines 
for other people, pal.



I'll just go with the script then: you DID believe those links to be true.

Then, please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies for calling 
you a liar.


I'll state it again, very clearly, all uppercase:

YOU NEVER LIED. I WAS WRONG.

Please accept the attached fruit basket as a gesture of good will.

===

Where does this leave us, then?

At BEST, you have been trolling the mailing list, sending inflammatory 
false content with the purpose of getting a strong reaction from the 
participants.


At WORST, you have demonstrated some abysmal gross incompetence, since 
in order to win an argument you:


* googled some keywords;
* got the first couple of links that seemed to match your thesis;
* didn't even bother to read the contents;
* pasted the links here believing they were true, without questioning 
the veracity of such explosive statements;
* when busted, dug your hole even deeper by keeping arguing in that 
direction.


(...I'm not alone about bringing this possibility forward...)

Spoiler alert, the links were April fools' jokes. They have never been 
true, and it was even written in the articles that they were jokes. With 
such precedents, why should anyone believe *any* other argument you 
bring forward?


===

In either case, it is abundantly clear who's full of shit around here.

It is also clear to me that moderation on this list doesn't exist, or if 
it exists, it doesn't want to get sides, and/or considers these 
behaviours acceptable.


I don't. And I don't send ultimatums or threats of libel lawsuits 
(seriously?) around, including to the moderators, in order to force them 
to make a move.


Hence, I'll be removing myself from this list, effective immediately.


You win. Audience claps. Curtains.

Ad astra per aspera,
--
Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

Re: [Interest] L Word

[Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest]

On 29/04/2021 00:08, Roland Hughes wrote:


On 4/21/21 5:00 AM, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:

On your right: witness B, found to be lying multiple times in the past


I have never lied in here. Been incorrect at times? Most assuredly at 
some point. I have never lied.


https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lying-definition/

=

(L1)To lie =_df to make a believed-false statement to another person 
with the intention that the other person believe that statement to be true.


L1 is the traditional definition of lying. According to L1, there are at 
least four necessary conditions for lying. First, lying requires that a 
person make a statement (statement condition). Second, **lying requires 
that the person believe the statement to be false**; that is, lying 
requires that the statement be untruthful (untruthfulness condition). 
Third, lying requires that the untruthful statement be made to another 
person (addressee condition). Fourth, lying requires that the person 
intend that that other person believe the untruthful statement to be 
true (intention to deceive the addressee condition).




Fantastic! Let's go with this, with a random example: did you or did you 
not believe that operator new was "deprecated in C++20 and slated for 
removal in C++23", and that smart pointers "most likely they will go 
away with "new.""?



https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/2019-December/034245.html


If the answer is yes, you were lying. If the answer is no, or you don't 
answer, then you're trolling the mailing list. You'll get my apology; 
I'll even throw in, for free, my personal congratulations for the long 
trolling. But, you'll get a nice permanent ban from here.




Long ago I came to terms with every Usenet news group or Internet 
mailing list comes one troll with a God complex. They have skin ten 
thousands of an inch thick and consider everything a personal insult. 
For whatever reason, you've chosen to be that here. Fine.


Ha ha ha ha.


What I can't understand is why the moderators haven't yet put you on a 
forced 18+month vacation, especially given all of the emails coming 
around off-list.


Oh really? Have I contacted YOU off-list? Could you produce an example? 
(You may have noticed that my emails are cryptographically signed, so 
good luck with this).


Or someone else contacted you off-list? In which case, you must be so 
lucky at having so many dedicated fans writing directly to you. If only 
they came forward here contributing to the discussions, this mailing 
list would be much more alive.




Here's the thing.

[snip of a huge, nonsensical 


**lying requires that the person believe the statement to be false**

__OR__

You can make amends, here, publicly, and go away for a while whether it 
is imposed or not.


Failing that I will have to pursue this via other avenues.


Get out.


--
Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest

[Interest] L Word

[Roland Hughes via Interest]

On 4/21/21 5:00 AM, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:

On your right: witness B, found to be lying multiple times in the past


I have never lied in here. Been incorrect at times? Most assuredly at 
some point. I have never lied.


https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lying-definition/

=

(L1)To lie =_df to make a believed-false statement to another person 
with the intention that the other person believe that statement to be true.


L1 is the traditional definition of lying. According to L1, there are at 
least four necessary conditions for lying. First, lying requires that a 
person make a statement (statement condition). Second, **lying requires 
that the person believe the statement to be false**; that is, lying 
requires that the statement be untruthful (untruthfulness condition). 
Third, lying requires that the untruthful statement be made to another 
person (addressee condition). Fourth, lying requires that the person 
intend that that other person believe the untruthful statement to be 
true (intention to deceive the addressee condition).


=

Long ago I came to terms with every Usenet news group or Internet 
mailing list comes one troll with a God complex. They have skin ten 
thousands of an inch thick and consider everything a personal insult. 
For whatever reason, you've chosen to be that here. Fine.


What I can't understand is why the moderators haven't yet put you on a 
forced 18+month vacation, especially given all of the emails coming 
around off-list.


Here's the thing.

I don't care when Internet trolls call me names or even when they accuse 
me of vile physical relationships with blood relatives, family pets, or 
farm animals. It's what trolls do. Be on the Internet long enough and 
you figure it out. Apparently I have rather thick skin because I 
generally don't even notice things others call personal insults. I don't 
care when people try to hold up my code and laugh at it. Very few things 
I write compile on the very first attempt. Most certainly they tend to 
compile and run incorrectly until I track down the major issues and some 
of the minor ones. Generally I'm confident that I have many thousands 
(many tens of thousands most likely) of code in devices that are helping 
to save lives each and every day. Most of the people who try to laugh at 
my code don't have that, and I know this.


None of that bothers me in general. It might irritate at the end of a 
particularly long and frustrating day, but in general it's just gas.


When you made that statement, you jumped with both feet onto the L Word.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/libel

You weren't directly responding to a single statement with something 
like "That's a lie" stating disbelief. You directly attacked my 
professional integrity without citation.


Before you go reaching for the old chestnut of K with no meaning be advised:

=

in Message-ID: <10924316.ADL2evRJuH@tjmaciei-mobl1> Thiago stated

The KDE representative to the KDE Free Qt Foundation was also there and 
he says he's

the one who tried to retroactively call it "Kool" but it didn't stick.

That's the opposite of Linux, where the original author had a different name
for his project when he first uploaded it and it didn't stick.

=

My statements were based on the official upload/entry/registration. 
Everybody arguing with me had a passion for a development code name. 
They don't appear to have the same passion when it comes to Windows 10. 
I don't hear any of them calling it Redstone, Santorini, Vibranium, etc.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Microsoft_codenames

People remember from official release and registration. That's what 
people (not me) are writing books about.


Hopefully you aren't going to reach for what Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum 
discussed with me on dart nights at Two Rivers because nobody in this 
list was there.


Sadly, you did this using your kdab.com email address, thus exposing 
them as well.


I guess I can give you until end of day on Monday (locally for me in the 
Chicago timezone) to scrounge through the archives and identify at least 
two messages from me (you did say multiple) that meet the Standford 
definition of a lie. You can't, but I'm willing to let you try. Keep 
this in mind:


**lying requires that the person believe the statement to be false**

__OR__

You can make amends, here, publicly, and go away for a while whether it 
is imposed or not.


Failing that I will have to pursue this via other avenues.

My apologies to everyone else for them having to read this.

--
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
http://www.logikalblog.com
http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog

___
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest