| 1 |
Daniel Robbins wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 3/3/07, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Why does it matter whether it's written by Gentoo developers? What |
| 4 |
>> matters is that it's written by people who know what they're talking |
| 5 |
>> about and who can write reasonably decent technical material, and as the |
| 6 |
>> primary author of the devmanual, a whole load of ebuilds, several |
| 7 |
>> eclasses and of the only fully independent reimplementation of ebuild |
| 8 |
>> (Pkgcore is in parts based upon Portage code -- whether or not this is |
| 9 |
>> a good thing is irrelevant to this discussion), I'd say I qualify in |
| 10 |
>> that area... |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Well, you were kicked from this project, and those who kicked you |
| 13 |
> shouldn't be allowed to have their cake and eat it too. If you were |
| 14 |
> kicked because you were deemed to be "bad" for Gentoo development, |
| 15 |
> then presumably those reasons still apply and you shouldn't be allowed |
| 16 |
> to participate in Gentoo development currently as you have been. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> If those reasons no longer apply, then your developer status should be |
| 19 |
> handed back. You can't "sorta" participate - you're either in or |
| 20 |
> you're not, and it looks like you're in. Right now it seems like you |
| 21 |
> are fully engaged as a developer in an official Gentoo project. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> So I think some people should decide whether removing you from Gentoo |
| 24 |
> development was the correct decision and should be enforced or was a |
| 25 |
> mistake and should be corrected. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Presumably, you were kicked for non-technical reasons. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> I'd just like the council/devrel to take a position one way or the other. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> I'm not trying to get you kicked as much as I'm trying to determine |
| 32 |
> whether there are still clearly-defined rules for Gentoo development |
| 33 |
> that are enforced in any meaningful or consistent way. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> -Daniel |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Take your personal arguing outside this mailing list. We don't turn back |
| 38 |
people doing good work but we expect them to know how to behave, but I |
| 39 |
am not going to take a stance how this applies here at this point and |
| 40 |
it's more of devrel's thing any way. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
I wonder if this thread would have been like this if deadline was called |
| 43 |
timetable in the original mail. I asked for access to PMS and got it so |
| 44 |
I don't see any problem it being in any way too secret. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Regards, |
| 47 |
Petteri |
Archives