| 1 |
On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 22:18 +1000, Andrew Cowie wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2006-06-23 at 06:50 -0500, Joshua Nichols wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > OK, so - java folks, please, take your java migration overlay bugs |
| 4 |
> > > somewhere else from bugzilla. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> The gentoo-java developers have been working their tails off for over a |
| 7 |
> year to do a massive migration (far broader reaching than the average |
| 8 |
> GCC major version upgrade). That you would turn around and tell them to |
| 9 |
> begone from Gentoo bugzilla with this work is really a bit off colour. |
| 10 |
No, it just shows that two different standards are applied and jakub (as |
| 11 |
well as some others) do not wish for any discrimination. |
| 12 |
If sunrise gets blocked with the argument "it's an overlay" then, by |
| 13 |
logic, the Java overlay should get the same treatment, even if this is |
| 14 |
stupid, unfair and stupid. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> They deserve every possible accolade we can give them for their |
| 17 |
> dedication to the cause, and every bit of support we can muster to help |
| 18 |
> them see this project through to completion. |
| 19 |
I agree with you there. While I'd prefer to get rid of Java I don't let |
| 20 |
that influence my behaviour towards the project (or I'd have kicked them |
| 21 |
off my server a long time ago!) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I'm sorry if the sunrise-related decisions have negative influence on |
| 24 |
other projects and I hope that these issues get sorted out soon. |
| 25 |
Personally I find this debate silly, jokey and genstef have done |
| 26 |
whatever they could to reach a compromise for sunrise without castrating |
| 27 |
the project. If that isn't enough it starts to look to me like an attack |
| 28 |
on the persons and not on the technical structure. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
wkr, |
| 31 |
Patrick |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move |
Archives