Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Sebastian Pipping <sping@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Tone in Gentoo
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:51:53
Message-Id: 4C1C30B7.1020300@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Tone in Gentoo by Jeroen Roovers
1 On 06/18/10 05:43, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
2 >> Hmm - thats interesting, I subconsciously read the two questions into
3 >> the one posted. I accept you point. Its something I am likely to
4 >> write myself without thinking about it too much too.
5 >
6 > Oh, this is a good one. Without introducing the problem, it is being
7 > assured that devrel has a problem because (some?) Gentoo users have a
8 > problem. So I ask very straightforwardly when this was pointed out to
9 > devrel, because I don't see the information being introduced to the
10 > wider public that has led to this public e-mail accusing devrel of not
11 > doing their job. Excuse me please, but how did I not turn out to ask
12 > the right question about the information that wasn't exposed on a
13 > public mailing list? And if I did put a vitriolic spin on it, then
14
15 Jeroen, I'm not sure if I understood all of this ^^^.
16 Is there anything I can still turn for the better?
17
18
19 > how
20 > would you sanctify your actions that bypassed normal procedure without
21 > actually at least summarising how that procedure ran to a dead end?
22
23 My latest thread of communication with them ended in X treating me like
24 a child and me ending the discussion due to that.
25
26 Best,
27
28
29
30 Sebastian