| 1 |
On Thursday 19 June 2008 02:43:12 Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> Nope. What I see as a problem is that the primary author and current |
| 3 |
> de facto maintainer is so much of an asshole that he was forcibly |
| 4 |
> removed from the Gentoo project, which PMS is supposed to be written |
| 5 |
> for, and has ostracized (at least) one of the package manager's |
| 6 |
> development team with his constant not-so-subtle attacks. Quite |
| 7 |
> frankly, I'd prefer see Gentoo take control over the specification that |
| 8 |
> defines the most important single feature of Gentoo and remove the |
| 9 |
> non-Gentoo developers from its development. No offense, but you're not |
| 10 |
> a Gentoo developer any longer and you shouldn't have a say in how *we* |
| 11 |
> manage ourselves. You're more than welcome to contribute code, fork, or |
| 12 |
> whatever the hell you want. This is open source, after all, but that |
| 13 |
> doesn't mean you should be allowed to hold the position of power over |
| 14 |
> Gentoo that you've been granted. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I would like to see Gentoo grow some balls and start banning people from -dev |
| 17 |
and other media used. I don't mean temporary bans, I mean for life. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Yes, it's not nice. Yes, Gentoo should be open for all and encourage |
| 20 |
participation from all. However, some people have demonstrated time and time |
| 21 |
again over quite a number of years that they wont change no matter what. |
| 22 |
These people are posionous [1]. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Whilst growing this set of balls, consider scrapping PMS I've yet to see any |
| 25 |
tangiable gain (from a user perspective) but plently of loss (developers, |
| 26 |
hair, temper). |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
I'm leaving this list as I want no part in this any longer, so I won't read |
| 29 |
any replies. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Thanks |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Roy |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
[1] http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645 |
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives