1 |
El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 12:24 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió: |
2 |
> El sáb, 23-06-2012 a las 11:53 +0200, Peter Stuge escribió: |
3 |
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
4 |
> > > What is hurting is people demanding features without specifying what |
5 |
> > > the problem is |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > Part of enabling progress is to show a strong will to communicate, |
8 |
> > with the goal of extracting common understanding from discussion. |
9 |
> > |
10 |
> > In any project based on volunteer effort you must show that you too |
11 |
> > are interested in giving, for anyone to give you anything. |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > When it's not obvious that you want to receive - to the point where |
14 |
> > you drive the discussion (the horror!) in order to arrive at that |
15 |
> > point of common understanding - then people will be upset and look |
16 |
> > down on you, because dealing with you leaves too sour a taste behind. |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > //Peter |
20 |
> |
21 |
> As Peter explains, I think it is now clear enough what I was demanding |
22 |
> (about clarifying what is needed to get things in next EAPI to prevent |
23 |
> issues like Tommy is suffering to get multilib stuff done), but I star |
24 |
> to think Ciaran thinks it's easier to simply wear a blindfold on to keep |
25 |
> thinking all what he says cannot be corrected at all, neither improved |
26 |
> and others must follow his instructions blindly |
27 |
|
28 |
Ciaran, simply think that, if PMS team agrees with a doc explaining what |
29 |
needs to be provided and the procedure, you will also save time and not |
30 |
need to follow this tedious discussions, all parts will benefit for |
31 |
sure. |