X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <561C9FBA.9020005@xs4all.nl>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:07:54 +0200
From: "Bert Timmerman (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110429 Fedora/2.0.14-1.fc13 SeaMonkey/2.0.14
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Stop playing stupid political games with gEDA
References: <0788cca443ca40a88d6e21f1a216a759 AT net2air DOT co>	<560D81CE DOT 1010800 AT jump-ing DOT de>	<201510012211 DOT t91MBXPI025587 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>	<560DB972 DOT 30203 AT jump-ing DOT de>	<201510012306 DOT t91N6MXc027775 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>	<560DCC35 DOT 9010505 AT jump-ing DOT de>	<201510020041 DOT t920fM6o031268 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>	<560DE183 DOT 4060305 AT jump-ing DOT de>	<5BF9C4DF-32C7-4C06-9F96-8F82C935254E AT sbcglobal DOT net>	<mvcn1j$t88$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>	<561A121F DOT 90803 AT xs4all DOT nl>	<561A76B9 DOT 20006 AT ecosensory DOT com>	<CAC4O8c_v0Uhj9SYJZGL0obVLN1iOjsDmy1dO+FqR=fMY=Lp_Aw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>	<561BC108 DOT 9010706 AT xs4all DOT nl> <CAC4O8c9hArQT2H7P=B=yr7Y5LQ1zKWmswOMM7RsGR4XCGcAn5Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4O8c9hArQT2H7P=B=yr7Y5LQ1zKWmswOMM7RsGR4XCGcAn5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Note-from-DJ: This may be spam
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Bert Timmerman 
> (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl <mailto:bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl>) [via 
> geda-user AT delorie DOT com <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>] 
> <geda-user AT delorie DOT com <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>> wrote:
>
>     Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com
>     <mailto:britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com>) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com
>     <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>] wrote:
>
>
>
>         On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 6:48 AM, John Griessen
>         <john AT ecosensory DOT com <mailto:john AT ecosensory DOT com>
>         <mailto:john AT ecosensory DOT com <mailto:john AT ecosensory DOT com>>> wrote:
>
>             On 10/11/2015 02:39 AM, Bert Timmerman
>         (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl <mailto:bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl>
>         <mailto:bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl
>         <mailto:bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl>>) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com
>         <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
>         <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com <mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com>>]
>         wrote:
>
>                 I just checked: I see no new applications in Launchpad.
>
>                 AFAICT, no bug team rejections either, just a total of
>         three
>                 members who left (AndyM, PeterB and Traumflug).
>
>
>                 Any member of gEDAhead would want to have 1) as well.
>
>
>                 I don't see the additional value of gEDAhead.
>
>
>             So, the low barrier of using gedahead also creates an
>         extra site
>             and login for the full admins to do
>             as a chore.  And the rigor of gedahead users seems lower
>         with no
>             bug team applications, so gedahead tracker might
>             just create more sifting to do, maybe even attract spam.
>
>             I've seen a lot of inertia in this project, (and other FOSS
>             projects), and it seems natural to me,
>             yet Markus seems impatient with it.
>             His manners towards me are lacking.  I'm not worried that
>         he seems
>             to have dropped gedahead.
>
>
>         Given that he as doing really quite nice work as integrator,
>         plus submitting lots of patches himself, I'm somewhat
>         worried.  I wish the stupid feud could end and Markus was most
>         active at the moment at least so driving him off seems like a
>         poor solution.
>
>     Hi Britton,
>
>     I do not fully agree with your last statement.
>
>     I wish this stupid "feud" as you call it, could stop too.
>
>     Calling it a "feud" gives it more credit than it deserves, IMHO
>     it's single sided and "targeted" people just defend themselves.
>
>     Everyone who has earned a place *somewhere* should be left in
>     peace in that place, pushing and shoving of volunteers in FOSS is
>     *not* acceptable.
>
>     The way I see it is that Markus drove himself off being too impatient.
>
>
> He referred to lots of emails, and the other parties have never denied 
> them.  My understanding is he didn't get given some stupid blessing or 
> sanctification or other and got angry.  I don't know or care what it 
> was exactly, but it was almost certainly a bad mistake not to just 
> give it to him.
> What damage would it have done beyond what happened anyway?
>
> It's not as if gEDA has piles of eager volunteers.  His claim to have 
> been doing more than most seems accurate based on the repository.  So 
> what was the problem?
>
> Britton
Hi Britton,

Running the long liner below

git log --format='%aN' | sort -u | while read name; do echo -en 
"$name\t"; git log --author="$name" --pretty=tformat: --numstat | awk '{ 
add += $1; subs += $2; loc += $1 - $2 } END { printf "added lines: %s, 
removed lines: %s, total lines: %s\n", add, subs, loc }' -; done

|
sums it up nicely ;-) although

git shortlog -s -n

would have done too.

For me this is not about the quality or quantity of commits, lines added or removed.
|
For me things revolve around stability, reliability.


Please do not misunderstand this for keeping a status quo, or a 
code/feature freeze or regulating progress.

It's just that I'm not comfortable with the "revolution" model, where 
the "evolution" model could give less turmoil and more stability for the 
future.

It's the references to "the other parties" and similar addressing that 
is bothering me, there was never a truly "us" in the conversations 
stated from Markus his part, at least that's how I received it.

I don't know exactly "who" denied "what" to "whom", and if it was a 
"confirmed denial" or "not reacting" to a "driven" statement.

This one of those subjects where *everything* needs to be discussed in 
the open, otherwise discussion over hidden agendas will flare up in the 
future.

And we all should know what it *exactly* was, as to prevent this from 
happening ever again.

And sadly, not everything is open for discussion in public, the Personal 
Identfication Number of my bank account for one, or the geda-project.org 
root password, or ...

I think you can come up with a scenario or two when vulnerable data gets 
out in the open.

Give you a clue: one single gEDA administrator named ... <name of the 
first person who grabs it> and all others administrators expelled.

Same for my bank account.

Now for the damage that has been done as I see it:

1) At least two driven and known developers lost for gEDA, maybe one of 
them turns around in a couple of years, or starts a fork to suit his 
ambitions.

2) A number of potential developers lost, probably scared off by this 
"feud", to be unknown to us for ever.

3) More care and energy needed in the future to embed new developers, we 
do not want to walk this line again.

4) Bad "reputation" for developers in the user base, more suspicion of 
"hidden agendas" (I think there are none, but then again some users have 
strong agendas too).

5) ... you may find more damages if you think hard enough.

Resume: infights are *very* counter-productive.

Kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.

BTW: it takes two or more to have an infight.

BTW2: you can't infight yourself alone.