Mail Archives: geda-user/2015/10/06/15:51:21
--089e010d8212665ff3052174f375
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Markus Hitter (mah AT jump-ing DOT de) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> Am 06.10.2015 um 20:06 schrieb DJ Delorie:
> > except for one thing...
> >
> > Instead of using the existing bug trackers, he created a new private[*]
> > bug-tracker/PPA that implies that it's the official gEDA project page,
> > and had all the work done in that tracker instead of the official
> > ones.
> >
> > [*] I say "private" because it's owned by him, and not by the geda
> > admin group.
>
> You see, it's exactly this nonsense why I consider it pointless to put
> any more work into gEDA:
>
> 1. This bug tracker isn't owned by me, it's owned by gEDAhead. A simple
> look at the tracker would confirm this, but apparently you didn't even
> look.
>
> 2. If I had seen a chance to remove my name entirely from the gEDAhead
> effort I certainly would have removed it, because "ownership" is
> something impossible in a collaborative effort. Unfortunately it's not
> possible to remove my name; it'll stay there just because I was the one
> who clicked "create".
>
> 3. Neither gEDAhead nor this bug tracker claims to be "official".
> gEDAhead doesn't care about "official". gEDAhead cares about making
> development convenient and about bringing results to the users.
>
> > He claimed it was done in the name of openness
>
> Right. There's the explanation you're missing so badly.
>
> If you prefer bugs fixed not only using a different bug tracker, but in
> an entire code fork, please join Igor2, Peter Clifton, Stefan Salewski,
> ... oh, wait, all these people don't want to join anybody. Too bad.
>
>
> > but neglected to
> > discuss it with any of the other admins,
>
> Up to the days when gEDAhead was successful, traditional admins were
> entirely deaf. I wrote them, they didn't anwer at all. Others wrote
> them, no answer either. Volunteers were clicked away without discussion.
> You, DJ, claimed to have no business with this team (and actually were
> member, but on the low privilege level).
>
> Now you try hard to find reasons to attack me personally. Not all five
> members of the gEDAhead team, but only me. Granted, you can attack me as
> much as you want. But by attacking you won't gain anything but you own
> or gEDA's destruction.
>
> The really shocking fact for me is that the moment you became owner of
> this traditional Launchpad team you fell into almost the same deafness
> and stubborness your precedessors showed over the years. I had really
> expected more from you.
>
>
> Very obviously you simply try to cover the more than obvious failure of
> the traditional team. gEDAhead was more successful in 10 days than the
> traditional team in the last 2 years. Times have changed.
>
I think it's not quite right to credit all this to gEDAhead. There were
numerous talks on the list about what might be done to get things going
again and at least partly as a consequence a lot of people got the idea it
might be worth participating. A lot of that discussion predated gEDAhead.
Others contributed as well with code sprint (wasn't that Bert originally.
Your effort both code and code review has been really good, why waste the
energy with this feud? Having two parallel BTS is obviously a bad outcome
whatever the cause.
--089e010d8212665ff3052174f375
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quo=
te">On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Markus Hitter (<a href=3D"mailto:mah AT j=
ump-ing.de">mah AT jump-ing DOT de</a>) [via <a href=3D"mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT c=
om">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>] <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:geda=
-user AT delorie DOT com" target=3D"_blank">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>></span> w=
rote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=3D"">Am 06.10.2015 um 2=
0:06 schrieb DJ Delorie:<br>
> except for one thing...<br>
><br>
> Instead of using the existing bug trackers, he created a new private[*=
]<br>
> bug-tracker/PPA that implies that it's the official gEDA project p=
age,<br>
> and had all the work done in that tracker instead of the official<br>
> ones.<br>
><br>
> [*] I say "private" because it's owned by him, and not b=
y the geda<br>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0admin group.<br>
<br>
</span>You see, it's exactly this nonsense why I consider it pointless =
to put<br>
any more work into gEDA:<br>
<br>
1. This bug tracker isn't owned by me, it's owned by gEDAhead. A si=
mple<br>
look at the tracker would confirm this, but apparently you didn't even =
look.<br>
<br>
2. If I had seen a chance to remove my name entirely from the gEDAhead<br>
effort I certainly would have removed it, because "ownership" is<=
br>
something impossible in a collaborative effort. Unfortunately it's not<=
br>
possible to remove my name; it'll stay there just because I was the one=
<br>
who clicked "create".<br>
<br>
3. Neither gEDAhead nor this bug tracker claims to be "official".=
<br>
gEDAhead doesn't care about "official". gEDAhead cares about =
making<br>
development convenient and about bringing results to the users.<br>
<span class=3D""><br>
> He claimed it was done in the name of openness<br>
<br>
</span>Right. There's the explanation you're missing so badly.<br>
<br>
If you prefer bugs fixed not only using a different bug tracker, but in<br>
an entire code fork, please join Igor2, Peter Clifton, Stefan Salewski,<br>
... oh, wait, all these people don't want to join anybody. Too bad.<br>
<span class=3D""><br>
<br>
> but neglected to<br>
> discuss it with any of the other admins,<br>
<br>
</span>Up to the days when gEDAhead was successful, traditional admins were=
<br>
entirely deaf. I wrote them, they didn't anwer at all. Others wrote<br>
them, no answer either. Volunteers were clicked away without discussion.<br=
>
You, DJ, claimed to have no business with this team (and actually were<br>
member, but on the low privilege level).<br>
<br>
Now you try hard to find reasons to attack me personally. Not all five<br>
members of the gEDAhead team, but only me. Granted, you can attack me as<br=
>
much as you want. But by attacking you won't gain anything but you own<=
br>
or gEDA's destruction.<br>
<br>
The really shocking fact for me is that the moment you became owner of<br>
this traditional Launchpad team you fell into almost the same deafness<br>
and stubborness your precedessors showed over the years. I had really<br>
expected more from you.<br>
<br>
<br>
Very obviously you simply try to cover the more than obvious failure of<br>
the traditional team. gEDAhead was more successful in 10 days than the<br>
traditional team in the last 2 years. Times have changed.<br></blockquote><=
div><br></div><div style=3D"">I think it's not quite right to credit al=
l this to gEDAhead.=C2=A0 There were numerous talks on the list about what =
might be done to get things going again and at least partly as a consequenc=
e a lot of people got the idea it might be worth participating.=C2=A0 A lot=
of that discussion predated gEDAhead.</div><div style=3D"">Others contribu=
ted as well with code sprint (wasn't that Bert originally.</div><div st=
yle=3D""><br></div><div style=3D"">Your effort both code and code review ha=
s been really good, why waste the energy with this feud?=C2=A0 Having two p=
arallel BTS is obviously a bad outcome whatever the cause.</div><div style=
=3D""><br></div></div></div></div>
--089e010d8212665ff3052174f375--
- Raw text -