[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#345067: My understanding of the IDE mess, and why it does not make sense to apply the proposed patch

On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:09:45PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 19:55:48 +0100
> Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 11:58:58AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > > Version: 0.0.12-5
> > > 
> > > On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 13:51:22 +0100
> > > Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Notice that on wednesday, this bug will be open since 3 month, if
> > > > i am not wrong,
> > > 
> > > Ah - for some reason my bug-closing hint in changelog was ignored.
> > > How very annoying...
> > 
> > BTW, thanks for not crediting the research i did in the changelog
> > entry, and only mentioning Jurij, and then publicly blaming me in the
> > -6 changelog entry.
> Your repeatitive pointing out what big a fool I am gave me the
> impression that you yourself was handling your own credit.
> If you are unaware of what I am talking about then have a look at this:
> http://wiki.debian.org/LinuxKernelIdeProblem?action=diff&rev2=23&rev1=15
> The issue is solved thanks to folks figuring out the kernel actually
> behave and behaved earlier, not folks claiming that there is no problem.

Yeah, sure, and before jurij had a look, i didn't spent many hours looking at
the code, and following it in detail, and trying to convince you about the

I want to remember you that i proposed to do exactly that in erkelenz and was
plainly refused, and that normally it should be your responsability as the
maintainer of the package to do so.

> I know, I shouldn't even respond to a message like the above, feeding
> this irrelevant non-technical fight. sorry - couldn't resist.

You know, this is exactly the problem, and i am not the first who thinks it is
difficult to work with you on such issues, maybe you should reconsider your
part in this, too, don't you think ? 

At the start of each of those days, i tried to be positive and gave info and
looked at the code, and invested time to solve the issue, but invariably as
the day passed and you stayed staunch in your refusal to hearing any kind of
reason, i went over the border again. This happened not one time, but 4 days
in a row. You cannot say that i didn't show positive behavior, and tried to
solve the issue. If i where not convinced that you are not a bad guy, i would
say that you voluntarily forced me into going over the border, just to
ridicoulous me. So i think there was a serious communication problem here, but
putting all the blame on me and not aknowledging the work i did to solve the
bug is abysmal behavior.

I will not post again on this, and i hope that some of the others here will
have a word or two with you about this.

Sven Luther

Reply to: