Re: RFS: prboom (updated package)
* João Pinto <lamego.pinto@gmail.com> [2007-10-31 11:41:23 CET]:
> >The bad thing is that he seems to think to work outside the team,
> >producing patches outside the team and offering them for upload outside
> >the team is a good thing. I'd like you to *not* encourage such behavior,
> >thanks. It is actively working against what the team is about, what the
> >word team means in it's core.
>
> I see a sense of "elite" here, like you must be part of the club to
> participate on the club, this is not about open source, yes, there are
> teams, there are QA rules, there are policies, coordination,
> supervisions/mentoring, still, you can participate *with* a team without
> "joining" it as long you do it on a reasonably fashion.
Of course one can participate, and it is very welcome. But,
participating would mean to actually /communicate/ and *not* seek for
sponsors for a package that derives from the svn repository without any
concensus with the team, never have sent in any patches for it or
anything at all.
I would be the last to jump at people that actually try to participate
- though, Kmos is much more away from participating than I would have
ever been able to imagine.
> If you participate with too many teams (which is Marco's case) you can
> not "join" them all.
But Marco didn't participate. He commited along happily, breaking stuff
here and there because he doesn't think he should test things, and after
people got too annoyed with this and no response at all for whatever his
svn access got removed.
> He already admitted is failures and accepted the SVN access removal as a
> proper action, why do you need to kick him by making it look like the
> problem is that he is working alone without any concern for what other
> people say ?
Because having his svn access removed should had get him starting to
think. I don't know how his mind flows, but what would make a mind go
and think that after getting commit access removed that it is fine to
continue on packages of the team and seek for sponsors for uploading
them, continue the habit of no communication at all?
> >Yes. Of course it's o.k. to make most mistakes while learning, and I
> >hope Barry won't get mad with me about mentioning him explicitly now
> >but he clearly shows that it's acceptable to do some mistakes.
>
> I thought doing mistakes was something universally accepted as human. Not
> repeating them is smart.
Well, so you call Kmos un-smart, but that's your call.
> >What is *not* OK is to ignore requests on clearification and actively
> >working against the team. By uploading a team package without
> >communicating with the team, adding changes to it outside of team's
> >scope, not trying to get the changes in this shows that one doesn't care
> >about the team.
>
> This statement assumes bad faith from him, your are clearly concerned
> *ONLY* with the team, not with the ability to bring a new member to it, or
> to turn his collaboration into a more positive practice.
Then please try to explain to me in what weird mind it would make sense
that after svn access got removed and thus the person got removed from
the team, and that person being aware of that, in what weird mind it
makes sense to work on a package of that very team and upload it and ask
for sponsorship? Pretty please, I really would like to understand that,
really.
About the ability to bring a new member into the team, I am happy to
accept anyone that is willing to work with the team, in the team,
communicate with the team, and collaborate - all of things that Kmos
obviously is not willing to do.
So long,
Rhonda
Reply to: