Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:28:44PM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Sven Luther]
> > No, he is not, as far as i am concerned, unless he presents his
> > apologies first.
>
> For what? Commenting on your wast amount of email posted the last few
> days, and his suggestion that the amount of email could make the
> ftpmasters delete mails by mistake? I can not really believe that is
> your problem, so please enlighten me.
Sorry, but if they are not able to properly filter mails sent to the canonical
ftp-master address from the rest of their personal mail, i don't think they
are fit to do the job.
Also, his hints that futur mail from me will be ignored is unaceptable as
well, and i cannot work with people who don't take their responsabilities
seriously.
> > No, that is not acceptable, and probably not the right reason for
> > this. Until evidence proves otherwise, it is just because they don't
> > care to read those emails, and that that email address is simply
> > forwarded to /dev/null.
>
> I didn't say it was acceptable. I tried to put it in perspective.
> I'm well aware of at least some of the communication issues with the
> ftpmasters, but truly believe these problems are because the
> ftpmasters are overworked, not because they are evil. And I believe
The real problem is that they deny there is a problem, how do you hope to get
it fixed then ?
> this even though one of the ftpmasters told me on IRC to stop wasting
> his time when I wanted to discuss making the list of packages in NEW
> public. I put it on the account of misjudgement during stress, not
> evil will.
>
> I suspect you would be better off if you accepted that misjudgement
> and mistakes happen also for the ftpmasters. After all, your emails
So, but then i expect the same courtesy to go both ways, which it does not,
and furthermore they have the ultimate power to hinder my work and make my
live difficult, while the otherway is not true. With great power comes great
responsability, and the lest of them is to be civil, and reply to emails sent
by developers to the ftp-master role address.
> haven't been the perfect examples of rational and clear speek either
> (though not as hostile as others on the list. :). I do not hold that
> against you, and wish you didn't hold such miscommunications and and
> misjudgements against the other volunteers in Debian.
No, but they plainly refuse to admit there is a problem, what hope do you see
to it ever been fixed then ?
> > That would be a solution. But then are the ftp-masters ready to get
> > the problems they receive publicly visible ?
>
> I didn't propose to make it all public. request-tracker is capable of
> fine grained access control.
>
> > No, a professional attitude would have them reply to the people they
> > are working with.
>
> Again, I agree that the ftpmaster role should reply to all requests.
> But if the volunteers filling this role are very busy, it does not
> help to shout at them and send even more email. A different solution
I sent perhaps 3-4 or in any case less than 10 emails to them, over the past
two years. A couple of those was to have them clean up the reject queue which
was spaming debian-kernel daily, this hardly is shouting and sending even more
emails, isn't it. I sent one mail, and waited, and in the email spam case a
second or third a couple of weeks later if i remember well.
Someone who has not the time to reply to 3-4 civil emails in 2 years, well, he
should probably reconsider his involvement or whatever.
> must be found, and I hope and believe we are on our way to a solution
> to the problems the project is facing.
Let's hope so, but i have some doubts.
> > but this have become the norm these past couple month, and Steve's
> > 'proposal' was the last straw.
>
> I guess I do not read the proposal the way you read it. I read it as
> a document describing the problems the release team and the ftpmaster
> experiences with the release process, and their ideas on how to
> improve the situation. But first and formost, I read the proposal as
> a good step forward for the release of sarge. After all, the ideas
> for reorganizing the process for etch wasn't the most important part
> of the "vancouver" announcement. The most important part was that the
> release managers and the ftpmasters are coordinated in their work to
> release Sarge.
>
> Since the meeting 189 packages have been processed from the NEW queue.
> I believe this is the result of the meeting, where the ftpmasters was
> able to meet with prospective ftpmaster assistant. I also believe the
> increased effort to release sarge is a result of this meeting.
What increasing effort, start a giant flamewar by being utterly contemptuous
of our porters ? They could have published that part separatedly and post
sarge or whatever. And i didn't see a single line of apology or recognition
that they may have been wrong.
> I am truly sorry for loosing you. You have done a good job helping
> Debian progress the state of free software, and it is sad that you
> decide to throw in the towel because of hard language from a fellow
> Debian volunteer. :(
Because of continued abuse from top position folk for a couple of weeks now.
Hurt,
Sven Luther
Reply to: