| 1 |
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not |
| 4 |
> get ignored by them. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
We've already established the same is true for the games team. I'm a living |
| 8 |
example of it and I can't imagine I'm the only one. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Unlike games team members who believe it's best to |
| 12 |
> ignore certain developers. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I certainly hope we can still ignore abrasive developers since it's been |
| 16 |
proven many times that it's the best way to deal with them. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
So, you don't answer my question. Or rather, you answer with a specious |
| 19 |
statement. Since you're being unusually shy I will say what you're trying |
| 20 |
hard not so say. There are actually first-class projects catered for by |
| 21 |
first-class developers, and those can set rules like the mandatory use of |
| 22 |
an eclass and actually enforce them. Then there are second-class projects |
| 23 |
and developers who can do the same as long as it doesn't bother the |
| 24 |
first-class people. Second-class developers, often working quietly and |
| 25 |
steadily, not wasting their time on mailing-lists like I just did, can see |
| 26 |
their projects trampled over at any time for the mere reason that they were |
| 27 |
trying to keep their business in order, just like first-class developers do. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Thank you for the clarification. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Denis. |
Archives