On Friday, 28 February 2020 3:24:50 AM AEDT Martina Ferrari wrote:
> We have been trying to standarise processes for years, we have had many
> discussions and agreements.
Apparently not enough. :(
> I have put a lot of hard work onto that, and
> many times I had found my work clobbered by somebody who did not like or
> ignored what has been agreed and done, and again I had to manually fix
> stuff.
Some of your changes are equally disruptive.
> Dmitry has been refusing to accept the team's agreements for as long as
> we have been discussing about it,
What a bunch of nonsense accusations! Yes, I object to some changes but I've
also proposed some of them (e.g. "origtargz" stuff).
> and so far I have never seen him
> contribute anything more than "I don't like it" to the discussion.
I've just replied to Anthony with some arguments. I'm going to post few
comments to mail list soon. IMHO sometimes "I don't like it" should be enough
but given hostility of your message I doubt that you are able to accept any
arguments...
> We have agreed to things more than 2 years ago,
No we did not. If you recall our conversation I did not agree and here and
now I express objections once again.
> and if people still refuse to even try to follow these policies,
Personally I did try to follow the policy only to find it detrimental to the
progress.
> they make everybody's work more difficult.
You are not everybody. Your priority seem to be working on policy while my
priority is to work on the actual bugs, transitions and packaging of a very
difficult software in a Debian compliant manner. I'm not sure if anyone did
as much work here as I did yet according to you, I've 'never contributed
anything more than "I don't like it"'. This is unfair.
You are ignoring my input yet trying to force your impractical guidelines on
everybody by presenting them as "agreed upon".
> Again, we have had this discussion a dozen times already.
Gross exaggeration. Anyway if we had it that many times already then let's
have it one more time.
> We had agreed
> to move towards homogeneous processes & team ownership of packages.
Team ownership - yes, homogeneous - no. The latter does not work for some
packages.
> This was reinforced in the last pkg-go BoF at DebConf.
I have not been there. Did I miss a summary here in this mail list?
> I want to help the team grow and work better,
Like I don't want that?? What an aggressive rhetoric you are using!
> but I am tired of discussing the same thing
> over and over again.
OK, what specifically do you think we are discussing?
So far I've expressed concerns about new default and about converting
existing repositories to the new layout.
New default in dh-make-golang os OK-ish but converting existing repositories
is undesirable as it destroys maintainers' ergonomics.
Your "improvements" are only as good as they are useful.
> If we can't accept that consensus, let's have a vote; but if everybody
> continues doing whatever they want, it is unworkable.
We can have a vote you you wish but that requires enough time for debates and
arguments. Frankly so far you have been doing whatever you want and I've been
doing what works. Who will benefit if you succeed in enforcing your
preferences?
--
Regards,
Dmitry Smirnov.
---
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.