[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: The powerpc port should be removed from etch release candidates ...

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:45:46PM +0200, Sven Mueller wrote:
> Sven Luther wrote on 01/05/2006 08:21:
> > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 02:20:09AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> > 
> >>The reason that I did not inform you was because things were already very 
> >>heated at the moment and because you were at that time still very 
> >>concerned about the welfare of your mother. I thought it was better not 
> >>to add to that.
> > 
> > And what have you gained ? What did you expect would happen once i noticed ?
> He thought he would gain not adding more pressure to you. He was wrong
> and he apologized for that. Stop picking on him, please.

My believe is that their intentions was to get ride of me, and by doing so in
one of the worst possible moment of my live, ...

So, no, i will not let this laps as long as the full problem is not solved.

> > Apologizes accepted, but this is not enough.
> Either you accept the apology or you don't. There is no "but".

Well, the real problem is that they don't admit that they had no valid reason
to remove the commit access, and that it was an abuse of their power.

As such, the apology in itself may well be seen as an additional insult, in
order to appear rightful without actually doing anything.

> > So, this is a first step, but i need more. I need :
> > 
> >   - the commit access being restored.
> I would second that request, if it was more humble. You don't "need"
> commit access restored, you just want it. So please be so kind to
> actually state the true thing.

Well. I am not sure. The removal of the commit access means that it is
acceptable in debian to hinder the work of someone just because he has annoyed
you or you personally dislikes him.

Would you think that someone from the DAM/DSA disliking a fellow DD is enough
to remove his upload rights ? Or anoying an ftp-master is enough to get his
package upload capacity removed ? Or annoying a list master is enough to get
you banned from debian lists ? See the controversial decision about
debian-devel-announce and assufield as a precedent of how such actions should
be taken.

This would mean that it would be perfectly acceptable for me to ban Frans from
the #debian-kernel irc channel, just because i cannot freely speak there,
without him picking on me each time i mention d-i ?

Also, one could argue that the d-i svn repo is the preffered form of
modification for d-i work, since this is clearly where and how the d-i work
is done, and since i contributed GPLed code to it, banning me from the repo
has obvious legalese implication debian should be ashamed of.

> >   - an apology for the lack of decency this action shows.
> You already got that. The apology might have been weaker than you hoped,
> but nevertheless, you accepted it (you said: "Apologizes accepted").

No. He just said he apologized for not telling me, not for chosing the moment
i was the most fragile, and when i personally asked him to be lenient, a few
hours after my mother which i had gone to help, almost died of a respiratory
crisis. This is the one i want an apology for, because sorry, but this is in
the same class as Andrew Suffield asking us not to send condoleances for
Jens's death last year, and it is for behaviour like this that Andrew Suffield
was almost expulsed from debian.

> >   - apologies for continual bashing would be nice, but more important you
> >     refraining from doing so in the future. When i post, avoid saying things
> >     like 'its the kernels fault' or otherwise indirectly pointing the finger
> >     back to me. 
> Stop being too sensitive. If someone says "its the kernels fault", why
> do you think they are pointing at you? Did you write the whole kernel?

So, you believe that something like :

  There is no problem with initramfs-tools, just a problem with the
  maintainer of the ppc port who is too quick to jump to conclusions again.

is not explicit pointing at me ? I have been getting this kind of thing from
Frans since a couple of month now, and yes, it is evident that in this
context, Frans was clearly aiming at me, altough in an indirect form.

> And it would also be nice if _you_ stopped pointing at various people
> (and Frans in particular).

Why ? It would be nice, probably, but would it be right ? They have personally
caused this problem, so who do you want me to point at ? Or do you want me to
say things in a vague or indirect way ? 

> > On my side, i will follow my one-post-per-thread policy, which i have mostly
> > been doing since the last two month, with only two backslides, and those two
> > backslides where always triggered by you being bashful, so i have good faith
> > that if you change a bit your behaviour, and my personal distress situation
> > calmiong down, that this will no more be a problem in the future.
> If you actually both stop letting of your frustration/anger on one
> another, but instead talked to each other like most educated people
> would do, there soon wouldn't be much anger left between the two of you.

I don't believe this. I worked fine with Frans in extremadura in january, but
at the first occasion he was picking at me again. This has been going on since
about a year, and since they believe they are oh-so-right about what they are
doing, i have no evidence that this will change in the future.

> @Sven: As a result of this thread, I read a lot of mails in various
> threads you were involved in. While I somewhat agree that people where
> picking on you, it has never been as bad as you try to make it look
> like. You are _way_ over-sensitive and see every hint at a technical

Well, given that this kind of problem has been going on since >6 month, it may
be a lot of small issues, but their accumulation is the problem.

Also, i may be over-sensitive as you say, but putting this in light of my
expulsion request in january, and the sudden sickness and death of my mother,
which all happened in the same timeframe as this happened ...

> problem as a personal attack (see the "it's the kernel's fault" comment
> above). People are pointing out that some particular program (or other
> part of the system) is accountable for a particular problem is _not_ a
> personal attack on you.

In this case, it is. 

> > But you have to live by the fact that i also have an opinion, and that i will
> > post things in the future which may annoy you, and it is not correct to expect
> > me not to do such posts.
> If you knowingly post things in a way that annoys others, you pretty
> much make sure to gather opponents rather than friends. Your posts
> mostly sound far more aggressive than they would need to. Try to focus
> on technical things, try to avoid personal issues.

I have done so, and continue to do so. I will not let this time the thing
drop, in order to suffer from it in a few months again.

> > So, the ball is in your camp, can you now stop this childish rejection of me,
> > come to your sense,
> As much as one _might_ see the removal of commit rights as a childish
> action, your reaction to it isn't any less childish.

Maybe. What other choice do i have though ? 

> > and that we continue working again ? I may have hit your
> > feelings, and said things that you took badly, and for this i apologize, but
> > you (and others) have done no less. 
> Wise words. If both of you (i.e. primarily Frans and Sven, but also the
> other people involved, such as the rest of the d-i team) calm down and
> try to focus on fixing technical things while avoiding personal stuff,
> you might be able to work together again in the near future. I sure hope
> so, since that would mean that d-i and especially the PowerPC port would
> improve more than it would without you cooperating.

Prerequisite for this is the restoration of the svn commit rights, and for
frans to stop saying, while wearing the d-i leader hat, stuff like : "if its
coming from you, it will not be considered anyway".


Sven Luther

Reply to: