X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=ChXp3Cgb3oP0yRkwgMMPCDa0jPlawnERZSfX1uGPP7M=;
	b=BnyNrsR9+WOrvbfyLmQ4O1v7Itm8Tai0Lmcqs1+n+6WnEDG4tzN2YP01cQITJqv3Tl
	SMDA5ipm0P1L84sBwFl9Pk2Yjj1gV0rwz/1XqNLXFcpgZUf3YPEPCmADFVzYeeXyzrAp
	8lQrRjRPJI+A5lXCu8d9faSuMSDkCGveqk+i3GwAdxwhY14NeMRQXBhYWX6gYX/xYfRe
	DIEwGm/OZ7YElLSrlDJq+0QRv6LLBL9CuQmPJuFWxkMm87zJf+rFocBf2MpWvqgmwkEe
	6mMd6rnHCQ1m99Lmo+0Vrk7KpUQndUCes3B0X1ktsqRbjyBmS3b5O0qUQO+QDikl4H3F
	k37A==
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Received:	by 10.112.77.197 with SMTP id u5mr12277859lbw.120.1444164222903;
	Tue, 06 Oct 2015 13:43:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:	<CAC4O8c-iyWQszA51k8q=yPV7vqYa=jfj612WQRPY4wc+_Makvg@mail.gmail.com>
References:	<20151003210701 DOT de392b925f54dadb0a5fedd8 AT gmail DOT com>
	<1443903758 DOT 1873 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<56104A0A DOT 9020507 AT xs4all DOT nl>
	<1443909591 DOT 1873 DOT 18 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<CAC4O8c_g7e562Gaotrbi6gLfjP6cJU1ys=MtEkDE7bSh4F9dfg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1443975731 DOT 671 DOT 52 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<20151004191717 DOT bf8223417541a9306bfbd9ea AT gmail DOT com>
	<CAC4O8c9Bi5HJfcW6wUgm_+4O2gs4vDdBMbS2hF_0dCqnBuJahQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1443997480 DOT 2068 DOT 32 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<CAC4O8c-bnGky=Nab59-pOTJkB8Q9Tc5t5hqE+dnEF-777hUjMg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<1444070851 DOT 1014 DOT 20 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de>
	<muv4ua$hat$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060356440 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
	<56133047 DOT 7030402 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1510060433080 DOT 7137 AT igor2priv>
	<56133CC4 DOT 7000306 AT neurotica DOT com>
	<56137585 DOT 2030004 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<CAM2RGhRZoQSJ-kUQfBTngGktreLbrM6=gbr=-+cUO4hx=2RavA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<201510061806 DOT t96I6tUG026305 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<56142095 DOT 8030800 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<CAC4O8c-iyWQszA51k8q=yPV7vqYa=jfj612WQRPY4wc+_Makvg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
Date:	Tue, 6 Oct 2015 20:43:42 +0000
Message-ID:	<CAM2RGhSjCFHG_MwMGOZkrCs_Aeyowgk6M9-772=HpyJwMN84EQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] GTK3, Glade interface designer (router, auto?)
From:	"Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To:	gEDA users mailing list <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Britton Kerin
(britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]
<geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
>
>
> 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.
>

I feel like Markus basically won when he was made admin. At the time I
thought it was wrong but I was not considering all the stuff Markus
had contributed. It now seems like a reasonable compromise.

What other than letting anyone who asks be admin would make things work?

-- 
Home
http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/
Work
http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/

- Raw text -