Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:57
Message-Id: fn2mga$h2i$
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess by Daniel Butzu
Daniel Butzu wrote:
> > I think there is something wrong with your knode since it is putting > into my mouth some words that I didn't say. When writing a mixed reply > is not enough to mention the name of only one initial sender.
Oh I'm sorry I thought you'd read the previous message. Here this should make it clearer:
>>> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> >> Daniel Butzu wrote: >> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: >> > >> >> For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think >> >> his terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was >> >> reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and >> >> only makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative >> >> press on distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a >> >> totally political move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo >> >> afaic. If he cared that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear >> >> privately or on the nfp list if he wanted to be "open". Not put >> >> everyone through all this stress. >> >> >> > Maybe. However, since it caused the furore it did it seems that a lot >> > of users were unsatisfied. >>
Since you ignored what "the rest of my mail was about", I included some of it, and expanded on it to explain what I meant. Sorry for your confusion. In this mail anything starting >> or '>> >>' is mine.
>> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>>> >> > Users used to feel just as excluded when drobbins was in charge >> There appears to be some myth going round that everything was sweetness >> and light back in those days; it's not true, and further the distro was >> an absolute pig to maintain: >> <long time user> "I used Gentoo when it was version 0.7, which was omg >> broken. Packages were added to portage and this would be stable, that >> would not compile at all. Then you had to re-sync to compile it, so in a >> day, you would need to re-sync portage 3 or 4 times to get everything to >> compile. :P ..Even still back in the 1.4 days, people really had no idea >> what to do." >>
>> Daniel Butzu wrote: >> > You can't stir up something when there is nothing to stir up. >> >> Actually I think this whole drama shows that you can, or at least you can >> draw attention to one thing (lack of paperwork) and pretend it means >> something else (Gentoo is dying! Again!) People like drama. >> >> Daniel Butzu wrote: >> > So maybe we should focus more on our problems today, since we were >> > unable of doing it yesterday. >> >> Er yeah, maybe you'd like to discuss those then? That was what the rest >> of my mail was about. >>
As in:
>> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> >> >> I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the >> >> dev m-l are the biggest problems I see. >> >> As in, how do we constructively change those? Or do you believe that can >> only be done by drobbins taking exclusive ownership of everyone's code? >>
HTH, steveL: looking forward to your points. -- gentoo-project@l.g.o mailing list