Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 12:13:43AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> Common sense is all I ask for. And the common sense is: do not trample over
> components for which you are not a lead maintainer, especially for
> components (or ports) that _do_ have active maintainers.
> Give others the time to respond and do not commit unless you have _explicit_
> agreement from those maintainers.
You're missrepresenting facts. I may not have done everything perfectly, but
there's a grayscale between black and white and you're skipping it completely.
> Just like Otavio, I _do_ see your contributions, but I also strongly feel
> that you're often way too pushy, both in discussions (like over gnash),
Same thing again. Does the fact that I stepped back from my request based on
judgement from the Gnash maintainer tell you something? Besides, I don't think
I should restrain myself from giving my *opinion* on components for which I
don't even have write access to.
> migrations (grub2)
GRUB is not a D-I component; in Debian it has three maintainers, and we take
major decisions by consensus. Besides, the fact that the migration hasn't
happened yet should tell you something as well.
> I have a very string feeling that I cannot trust your judgement because
> you're always wanting to jump 10 steps ahead, without due considerations of
> risks and proper timing.
> As someone who does a lot of coordinating for D-I, I constantly have the
> feeling that I have to be extra alert for whatever next crazy change you'll
> want to push past everybody and that's just not a comfortable feeling.
Even if I made a minor mistake, which I don't deny, I find it highly disturbing
that after making the effort to check things and talking with maintainers over
a proposed change, your conclussion is that you can't trust my judgement and
that I push for "crazy changes" (how crazy is to add versatile support?).
I'm willing to observe rules when they come in clear messages stating what I
may and may not do. And since these have already been clarified in another mail,
I have nothing more to add on this regard.
OTOH, I find it unpleasant to contribute to D-I when I have to deal with this
kind of stressful responses. As it happens, by an unfortunate coincidence your
previous response ended up at my former employer's mailbox, which as you may
guess was a very inappropiate recipient for your biased description of my
<GPLv2> I know my rights; I want my phone call!
<DRM> What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak?
(as seen on /.)