Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] metadata/install-qa-check.d: add 60tmpfiles-path QA check

[David Seifert]

On Mon, 2021-08-09 at 19:50 +0200, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
> On 2021-08-08 13:17, David Seifert wrote:
> > So you've created a big commotion... because you didn't get the
> > initial
> > point? Honestly, this seems to be a recurring theme at this point.
> > Someone suggests some improved check/some change, and nowadays you
> > can
> > bet 50 quid that Whissi will pop up and bikeshed it in some way.
>
> No?
>
> First of all, just because you disagree with something or believe a
> discussion is wrong and or not necessary and start to frame it as
> bikeshedding, it doesn't actually become bikeshedding. This is a very
> sad and transparent attempt to silence people through defamation.
>
> The draft contains an error. It's saying that "/etc/tmpfiles.d" became
> deprecated which is not true. Because this would imply that it was
> previously acceptable for packages in Gentoo repository to install to
> that location which is not correct. If a packages in ::gentoo
> installed
> to /etc/tmpfiles.d before, this was already wrong.
>
> And my point was and still is, that neither the commit message nor the
> eqawarn should use the wording "deprecated" because nothing has
> changed
> -- no location became deprecated.
>
> And this will also address parts of antarus' previous mail: Because
> this
> QA check should be only about ::gentoo repository, this shouldn't
> affect
> any other repository. I.e. in your own overlay, you are free to do
> whatever you want and can't be forced to stick to Gentoo QA rules.
>
>
> > It's become a real problem at this point. In fact, we have proxy
> > maintainers publicly refusing to work on packages somehow involving
> > you
> > (I'll mention no names, but check the #-desktop backlog), because
> > your
> > personality boils down to three attributes nowadays:
>
> I am not in that channel and never was. If you make such an
> allegation,
> include facts so that I can respond. If you look at my complete
> history
> at GitHub issues you will find that most people I worked with
> appreciated to work with me. Of course there are some bugs/PRs where I
> rejected a requested change but I am not sure what your point is. This
> is normal because not every PR is valid.

#gentoo-desktop:

[00:00:00] - {Day changed to Friday, 6 August 2021}
[...]
[13:32:33] <pinkflames[m]> soap: we went over this last week, 1. I'm not
making any more PRs where I do not receive the recognition I deserve and
2. working with Whissi is probably impossible ;(
[...]
[13:34:50] <pinkflames[m]> I'm not sure how well it got through since he
didn't seem to respond to my concerns but I could also tell that he
really has an authoritative decision making style

Timestamps so you can verify it with a third-party. This is a public
statement, I will not share statements by people who have confided in
me.

> > 1. If I say the sky is blue, you'll say it's green. If I say it's
> > green,
> > you'll say it's blue. I've had at least 5 people tell me they see
> > the
> > exact same pattern in you (and no, mgorny is not part of that set,
> > before you throw that point at me). You're the textbook contrarian
> > of
> > Gentoo ("Wutbürger") right now.
> > 2. You'll tell people they are wrong, they aren't following
> > protocols,
> > they made a mistake, but you will never follow through with actually
> > telling people what/why or how. By the time people ask you "why?",
> > you've already disappeared. Given how frequently this happens in
> > multiple channels, projects and at different time points,
> > statistically,
> > this can't be explained by coincidence any more. This happens
> > practically on a daily basis, so you're not getting the benefit of
> > the
> > doubt any more.
> > 3. You can't let go. The security elections disaster right now is
> > the
> > prime example (yes, it's public, just check the history of the
> > Security
> > Project). This captures you so well: it's all about **community**
> > and
> > stuff, until you lose, then you start invoking technicalities and
> > procedural shenanigans to justify some ludicrous kind of "co-lead"
> > crap.
> > Frankly, it's embarrassing, and you're at the centre of it. Instead
> > of
> > accepting defeat (remember, community and democracy!), you just
> > fudge
> > the results.
>
> Interesting. You don't even now my view on this but you already have
> an
> opinion and are saying that I am the culprit. I think this is called
> "prejudiced".

To this day, we're still waiting for your view/statement/rebuttal of the
points, but have yet to receive anything.

> I am pretty sure that as a ComRel member you will abstain
> from this case as you seem to be superior. I mean you are publicly
> attacking me for 10+ months, rejected any attempt from my side when I
> tried to speak with you to get things sorted and now you showed how
> biased your are...

The last message I received from you was on 10 Jul. I have sent 3
follow-up messages before Monday, 12 Jul (when the Bernd low hit
Germany). Since then, nothing. And before you invoke the Bernd argument:
I'm also a first responder, and while the high Rhine wasn't nearly as
badly affected as the middle Rhine/Eifel area in terms of floodings, I
understand that you might not have had the time to respond (even though
you pushed 19 commits to ::gentoo on 13 Jul). That said, "let me check
whether soap wrote something in PM" seems to have never occurred since
12 Jul at any point, which raises doubts as to whether this is such a
critical issue after all...