1 |
Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: |
2 |
> Steven J. Long wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > Again you're wilfully misinterpreting what I've said, and answering a completely different |
5 |
> > point. You didn't know the basics of how to go about approaching Gentoo. |
6 |
|
7 |
> While I (and others BTW) |
8 |
|
9 |
My point is simply this: there is a world of difference between someone who simply sends two |
10 |
emails to the wrong place, a busy list that often has a lot of controversy on it, and someone |
11 |
who actively helps out other users, files bugs, patches and new or updated ebuilds and knows |
12 |
enough to be of use in #gentoo-dev-help. |
13 |
|
14 |
FTR, I do not count myself amongst that latter group. I just know them when I see them; but |
15 |
they're always known to gentoo folks already. |
16 |
|
17 |
> was trying to provide an external POV with |
18 |
> points to make outside contributions and rectruitement more efficient, |
19 |
|
20 |
You've sold your tirades under that banner, yes. I'm not buying; as is prob'y clear. |
21 |
|
22 |
> you guys @gentoo.org turned this thread into plain bullshits. |
23 |
|
24 |
As has been pointed out, I am not @gentoo.org. Sorry for use of 'we' in that context: I was |
25 |
perhaps reacting emotionally as well. Frankly I'd taken care to spell out exactly what I was |
26 |
saying, and you just ignored the content, and reacted to the perceived insult. |
27 |
|
28 |
> Starting with a statement like "Please note I'm not discussing any |
29 |
> technical ability you may or may not have." does not allow you to make |
30 |
> the exact opposite |
31 |
|
32 |
Again: I was not discussing technical ability. Knowing the basics of how Gentoo operates is |
33 |
not a technical challenge. So you're wrong: I never disparaged your technical ability as a |
34 |
"developer". |
35 |
|
36 |
Perhaps you should just take what people type at face value: it saves a lot of confusion. |
37 |
Especially given the differences in language that occur; that was why I spelt it out. |
38 |
|
39 |
> and being insulting or border-line in the rest of your mails. |
40 |
|
41 |
I was being sarcastic in my last mail. Prior to that I was truly simply trying to explain, |
42 |
where you'd gone wrong. Further, I spoke informally ("wtf did you expect?") since I assumed |
43 |
you were comfortable with the informality that is pretty much par for the course on most |
44 |
mailing-list and web-forums. |
45 |
|
46 |
And I stand by that: if you don't do the groundwork, I have zero sympathy for you. Of much |
47 |
more concern, and where the cultural shift needs to take place, are the people who do the |
48 |
groundwork, and are proven useful to the community and the project, but never acknowledged. |
49 |
Many of them have a decade or two of experience at least in Computing, and they'd be |
50 |
valuable and productive members of the dev-team, as well as bringing some longer-term |
51 |
perspective. |
52 |
|
53 |
But I actually think this whole thread is a change in that direction: developers are |
54 |
reaching out and asking for people to get involved, and engaging with those who have |
55 |
already been doing that, as well as providing the basic info to those who haven't. |
56 |
|
57 |
So in terms of Gentoo and the project we care about, things are getting better. IMO. |
58 |
|
59 |
BTW everything I say is my opinion. I don't usually bother to qualify it, as it's obvious |
60 |
imo. |
61 |
|
62 |
> I don't remember I ever faced to such direct and personal |
63 |
> judgments in the open source world. |
64 |
|
65 |
Blimey, you have led a sheltered life. You'll grow a thicker-skin: you'd better if you intend |
66 |
to do much in FLOSS. |
67 |
|
68 |
But feel free to hate me: you won't be alone, and I have grown a thicker skin over the last |
69 |
few years, so I'll cope. |
70 |
|
71 |
> Oh, I know you pretend it's not. |
72 |
|
73 |
No, I just think you take yourself too seriously. And you still haven't really sat down and |
74 |
considered the points I made in my first mail, which you prefer to have restated in order to |
75 |
ignore again, afaic. |
76 |
|
77 |
> So, I'm on my way, dear, in order to: |
78 |
> - learn how to approach a community (stuff that practically every user |
79 |
> knows); |
80 |
|
81 |
And yet you didn't, nor did you bother to do much looking around on the websites. More |
82 |
importantly, if you are intending to collaborate with a wider community, that believe me can |
83 |
be an awful lot nastier than me, you *really* cannot handle that being pointed out. You might |
84 |
want to work on that. |
85 |
|
86 |
> - learn where to find the doc and read it; |
87 |
> - learn all the basics; |
88 |
|
89 |
Hallelujah. I look forward to your contributions on bugzilla, the forums, IRC and sunrise. |
90 |
|
91 |
> - not magnify myself. |
92 |
> |
93 |
> Thank you for all the smart feedbacks. Obvisously, it was all about me. |
94 |
|
95 |
You did make it all about you, yeah. And then took everything personally as an attack on you, |
96 |
when two minutes' reflection (or a re-read) would have shown you that the basics were nothing |
97 |
at all to do with coding, and everything to do with Gentoo processes. |
98 |
|
99 |
> <F**k> |
100 |
> I want to believe you don't embody the dominant POV of the Gentoo |
101 |
> maintainers about the original topic. |
102 |
> </> |
103 |
|
104 |
I don't embody any official position on anything. However, from my experience, I think most |
105 |
people would expect you, or anyone else, to have at least done some basic research about the |
106 |
organisation they claim to want to join. |
107 |
|
108 |
> I'm going serioulsy tired of this thread. |
109 |
|
110 |
Me too. Repeating myself for the third time is really lame. So let's agree to kill it here, |
111 |
since neither of wants to go on with it. |
112 |
|
113 |
Don't let me put you off Gentoo: there's loads of much nicer people involved, and I'm nothing |
114 |
to do with anything. |
115 |
|
116 |
Just do your homework ;p |
117 |
|
118 |
Oh, as a general point, I find it helps to take a break from the keyboard if you're annoyed |
119 |
at what someone's said to you on a mailing-list (and on IRC.) What you shouldn't do is |
120 |
respond immediately from your sense of outrage or anger (or w/e.) Come back to it and re-read |
121 |
and first see whether there's another interpretation of the words, and as ever feel free to |
122 |
pick someone up on what's been said. You're less likely to miss subtleties, and more likely |
123 |
to keep it polite. |
124 |
|
125 |
And FFS, who cares if "someone on the internet is wrong"? |
126 |
|
127 |
Regards, |
128 |
steveL. |
129 |
-- |
130 |
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-) |