1 |
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:06:29 -0700 |
2 |
Denis Dupeyron <calchan@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
> > |
6 |
> > Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not |
7 |
> > get ignored by them. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> We've already established the same is true for the games team. I'm a living |
10 |
> example of it and I can't imagine I'm the only one. |
11 |
|
12 |
Good for you. So... ignoring majority is fine as long as you can prove |
13 |
that they don't ignore one of their old fellows. Good. |
14 |
|
15 |
> > Unlike games team members who believe it's best to |
16 |
> > ignore certain developers. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> I certainly hope we can still ignore abrasive developers since it's been |
19 |
> proven many times that it's the best way to deal with them. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> So, you don't answer my question. Or rather, you answer with a specious |
22 |
> statement. Since you're being unusually shy I will say what you're trying |
23 |
> hard not so say. There are actually first-class projects catered for by |
24 |
> first-class developers, and those can set rules like the mandatory use of |
25 |
> an eclass and actually enforce them. Then there are second-class projects |
26 |
> and developers who can do the same as long as it doesn't bother the |
27 |
> first-class people. Second-class developers, often working quietly and |
28 |
> steadily, not wasting their time on mailing-lists like I just did, can see |
29 |
> their projects trampled over at any time for the mere reason that they were |
30 |
> trying to keep their business in order, just like first-class developers do. |
31 |
|
32 |
Now you are trivializing the problem. I wasn't talking about mailing |
33 |
lists. I was talking about explicit questions, requests, pings. Mail, |
34 |
IRC, Bugzilla. |
35 |
|
36 |
If you get bug from the Council asking you what to do... don't you |
37 |
think it would be fair to reply? Of course, you could say 'mgorny |
38 |
opened the bug, I'm going to ignore him'. But the fact is, this is |
39 |
not some kind of 'quiet, steady work'. |
40 |
|
41 |
This is an explicit attempt of ignoring everyone with differing opinion |
42 |
by delaying things. Sure, you can disagree. But it's different to |
43 |
discuss disagreements and reach a consensus. And it's different if you |
44 |
silently ignore disagreeing opinions and make them wait months for |
45 |
a single reply, hoping to stall them from having any effect whatsoever. |
46 |
|
47 |
When was the last time games project got a new member? Where is that |
48 |
'premiere Linux gaming platform'? What about all these users? Why were |
49 |
we exposing security issues for almost 10 years? |
50 |
|
51 |
So we're the bad ones in your opinion, troubling the little closed |
52 |
team. We want to have some influence, bad us. We should just keep quiet |
53 |
and let us be ordered. Stand out of the line -- and you're a problem, |
54 |
you're abrasive developer, you should be ignored. |
55 |
|
56 |
-- |
57 |
Best regards, |
58 |
Michał Górny |
59 |
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |