Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: [soc] Python bindings for Paludis
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 09:43:02
Message-Id: euqj0c$6t1$
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [soc] Python bindings for Paludis by Seemant Kulleen
1 Seemant Kulleen wrote:
2 >> > That's uncalled for. There's no need to get nasty.
3 >>
4 >> I applaud your intent, but feel it would have far more effect on the
5 >> atmosphere if applied to a few of your devs, rather than users who employ
6 >> milder terms?
7 >>
8 >> It just seems knowingly unfair, and I don't believe that is your purpose.
9 >
10 > Not getting into this. If your intent is to undermine, please do it
11 > privately. If you're just trying to be inflammatory (as you seem to be
12 > often), please put a stop to it *NOW*.
13 <..>
14 Sorry, it was not to undermine at all, but rather to get some parity of
15 treatment for usrs as opposed to devs. I am more than willing to discuss
16 with you privately, however your _seeming_ bias which I am addressing has
17 been carried out publically. And if I am in fact to be moderated by the new
18 `asshat brigade', I would hope there would indeed be parity.
20 So: no, I am not trying to be inflammatory. Just to get the groundrules
21 sorted before those kinda comments from a core dev get me banned ;)
23 And yeah, Mr Sawtell has it right in at least one sense: you're overreacting
24 to what might to US ears be perceived as patronising, but in the UK is
25 simply careful language.
27 > You can check my posts to see me address anyone getting out of hand.
28 >
29 I'm not saying that you are wrong in addressing the people that you have.
30 Rather that you allow much more derogatory and frankly unprofessional
31 comments from devs. In this same thread, I have seen much worse comments;
32 the example that comes to mind is Mike Frysinger's spat with ciaranm.
34 Much as I think Ciaran is trolling this list, and apparently has a bot
35 sending out EAPI data regarding Portage non-compliance one line at a time
36 (that was a joke), and further that someone who has been banned from gentoo
37 development should in fact automatically be banned from the public dev m-l,
38 I cannot say I have thought all of Mr Frsyinger's comments appropriate or
39 helpful. I was actually ignoring this thread, and only read more of it
40 because I saw such core devs (council members?) commenting.
42 I had hoped to read a much more level-headed debate about socio-political
43 aspects of development in a virtual community. Instead I again saw a dev
44 resort to IRC-type nastiness instead of starving a troll. I left that
45 sub-thread and read only your insightful comments; Duncan said all I wanted
46 to, far better than I would have, about the original topic of PMs.
48 Although, based on Mr Warner's post, the whole topic about SoC should have
49 been on another list. Shame amne can't just move it like he would have ages
50 ago in the forums..
53 --
54 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list