On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:24:51AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > On Di, 21 Mai 2013, Steve Langasek wrote: > > As one of the most routinely abusive posters on Debian lists towards your > > fellow developers: not you. > Thus neither you ..., logic wins. > Wow, being told most abusive posters ... would you kindly use your > browser and browse my posts on debian-tex-maint lists and let > me know the ratio of "you-consider-abusive" to "you-consider-ok"?!?!? Abuse does not become acceptable by being embedded in a mass of politeness. Abuse is abuse and is always unacceptable. The ratios do not matter. Likewise, debian-tex-maint has no relevance to my comment. Even if you're perfectly polite there, all that establishes is that you're nice to people when you're in charge. It doesn't excuse your abusive posts on other lists (like debian-devel). On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 09:44:31AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: > I openly request an apology from you. That is unbearable: > You publicly defamed me by stating: > On Di, 21 Mai 2013, Steve Langasek wrote: > > As one of the most routinely abusive posters on Debian lists towards your > > fellow developers: not you. > Onto which I asked for evidence: > On Mi, 22 Mai 2013, Norbert Preining wrote: > > Wow, being told most abusive posters ... would you kindly use your > > browser and browse my posts on debian-tex-maint lists and let > > me know the ratio of "you-consider-abusive" to "you-consider-ok"?!?!? > If you cannot come up with support for the insult you posted here > (which was btw the first personal insult in these threads!) I will > take further steps necessary. You don't think it's a bit excessive to escalate to the DPL after 9 hours with no response? I do have other things to do with my day besides digging up references to mailing list posts. However, I do agree with you that, having accused you of being abusive to your peers on mailing lists and being asked for evidence, I have a responsibility to back up my statements. So, here we go: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/06/msg00441.html "And I am pissed that the alioth people are soo crazy ..." https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/06/msg00442.html "It is simply SNAFU!!!" In fairness, once you recognized you had a local configuration error, you apologized to the alioth admins. And perhaps as a non-native speaker, you don't know the expansion of "SNAFU", or recognize that it's offensive. But it is; and this is disrespectful of the work of the alioth team, and would be an inappropriate way to approach this problem even if the error had not been on your side. And this is not the only instance of such abuse from you. https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/12/msg00771.html "Can someone of the proposers of this (nice? stupid? rubbish?) format explain me please why on earth: - git-buildpackage - dpkg-buildpackage - and in fact at the bottom dpkg-source fuck around in my git repository, applying patches, just for builing a source package?" You tried the 3.0 (quilt) format and you didn't like it. That's understandable; it's not a perfect solution, many other people don't like it either, and its interactions with a package VCS are particularly frustrating. What's not ok is to refer to the format as "nice/stupid/rubbish", which is not made nicer by using the word "nice" as an option; or to describe what dpkg-source is doing as "fuck[ing] around in [your] git repository". This is rude, and disrespectful of the work of the dpkg maintainers. And again two years later: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/01/msg00478.html "So what is it that dpkg-buildpackage, dpkg-source, and all the quilt 3.0 stuff is soooo braindamaged????" Calling other people's work "braindamaged" is not respectful. And finally, in the most recent example: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/05/msg01138.html "Of course, RM will go hell for another embedded copy, but I don't give a big cake of chocolate or so for that." You may think this is just a matter of you being honest in a technical discussion. But it isn't; you went out of your way to mention that you don't care what the release team thinks of your plan. You later go on to explain why the upload you've done is perfectly safe and is not a security issue (<https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/05/msg01225.html>) - so why do you describe this as "another embedded copy" and claim that the release team will have a problem with it? Either you think the release team is too stupid to recognize that this copy included *only* in the source is a non-issue; or you're deliberately antagonizing them. All of this is inappropriate, abusive behavior towards your fellow developers. It does not belong on our mailing lists. And the fact that you don't realize this (as evidenced by the repeated occurrences, and that you challenged me for examples) is exactly why you should not be the arbiter of what's acceptable under a code of conduct. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature