Re: The unofficial buildd effort and its shutdown - my POV
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 08:44:36 +0200, Ingo Juergensmann <ij@2004.bluespice.org> said:
> It's a matter of being tired of all those discussions directed
> against you or your work (i.e. me), that made me to stop them. Why
> should I invest time and money when (in the end) this is not
> appreciated and worthless. So, decide first if that work is still
> wanted and tell us then your decision.
If you are volunteering for free software in order to feel
appreciated, I think you are destined for disappointement (as are
other people who may be doing this to meet young people of the
appropriate gender).
> What concern? I mean: people said that trust isn't something that
> you automatically get when you have a DD status. Either I've proven
> in the last 4 years that my buildds are trustworthy or not.
Quite so. I am indeed concerned that your machines seem not to
have made it into the official buildd list, leading me to
wonder where the problem lies.
> Security concerns are sometimes silly...
Uh-oh.
> for example the security concern of James Troup in using a many
> times published user/pass on the web for accessing the deb repositry
> on newraff for the buildds and sharing the user/pass for another
> buildd because Mr Troup was too lazy/loaded with work again to give
> such a user/pass for weeks! Where's the security concern in
> *downloading* things? With a password you can read in many failed
> build logs on buildd.d.o? Come on! Get real! (Note: sharing those
> login data between buildds was a long time used method back then,
> until Troup decided from one day to another that this is evil[TM]! -
> without prior notification of course)
I consider your conduct in the incident in question to be
incorrect, and a matter of concern. You were asked, politely, to
stop sharing the passwords, and your response was a refusal to do so;
calling security concerns of the buildd admins silly is not a great
way of getting people to trust your buildds.
> I've better things to do than to deal several years in fighting with
> James for becoming a DD.
You are implying you shall conduct yourself in a fashion that
shall cause James to have to reject you?
> And as said by others and me: you don't need to be a DD to be
> trusted, right?
Right. You just need to behave in a trustworthy fashion.
> So, where's the problem with not being a DD? The only disadvantage I
> see is that I'm not allowed to elect. That's all for me. Either you
Uploading packages, etc.
> trust me and appreciate my work on buildds or not. If you do trust
> me, please tell me so and end the discussion. If you don't, please
> tell me so and take on with your discussions. End of story. :)
Asking on -devel is going to get you largely noise; ask the
people who run the official buiuldd's about it.
> Again, it's about trust and appreciation of work. When you do your
> work and get the feeling or impression that other people have
> nothing better to do than putting your work into a bad light ("in
> ein schlechtes Licht ruecken" in german), you'll simply get that
> much annoyed that nobody need to tell you to stop your work.
If you have that thin a skin, you probably won't last long in
a free software project. Just look at how people treat aj and elmo.
manoj
--
"Plaese porrf raed." Prof. Michael O'Longhlin, S.U.N.Y. Purchase
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: