| 1 |
On Wed, 2020-02-12 at 23:03 -0800, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 9:59 PM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > On Thu, 2020-02-13 at 02:32 +0100, Thomas Deutschmann wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > Hi, |
| 6 |
> > > |
| 7 |
> > > thank you for bringing this to the list. |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > I have the same experience which is the reason why I haven't migrated |
| 10 |
> > > most of my packages yet (which is not a good move because I also didn't |
| 11 |
> > > post the problem to the list like I wanted *yet*, I only talked to |
| 12 |
> > > people via private mail, chat or at FOSDEM about that and was working on |
| 13 |
> > > a proposal I wanted to show next week when I am hopefully healthy again). |
| 14 |
> > > |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > In other words, instead of bringing the problem up to the person who |
| 17 |
> > created the GLEP and the eclasses and/or community at large, you've been |
| 18 |
> > conspiring behind their back. Yes, that's really the procommunity |
| 19 |
> > attitude we expect from Council members. Thanks for showing it again. |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> This is a bit of a double standard. Either people are 'conspiring behind |
| 23 |
> your back' or they 'are gathering data for a counterproposal.' There is no |
| 24 |
> need to paint a negative narrative here. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Yes, I certainly do have a reason to assume positive from someone who |
| 28 |
apparently mounts a counterproposal without bothering to consider |
| 29 |
the original reasons. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Best regards, |
| 33 |
Michał Górny |
Archives