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

Re: Bug#340462: gtk-gnutella: version in stable is too old for the network - upload to volatile



Hello Andreas,

On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:55:43AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> * Anand Kumria (wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au) [060207 09:44]:
> > [ I've removed 340462 from further follow-ups ]
> 
> just do what you promise to do.

Check what Reply-To: was set to -- I can only indicate what I would like
to happen, not force you to.  You chose to disregard my suggested
Reply-To.  This time I've dropped if from the CC list and left Reply-To
unset since you seem to know better and be content to ignore my
suggestions.

> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 09:08:58AM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > * Anand Kumria (wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au) [060207 04:03]:
> > > > Considering that volatile only useful package is (potentially) clamav
> > > > and that only if you are disconnected I'd say you are better off
> > > > rebuilding the package yourself and never using volatile.
> > > 
> > > I would prefer if you stop telling lies about volatile. 
> > 
> > You can believe whatever you want to believe.
> > 
> > I've done my analysis; I posted it publically.
> > 
> > If there were obvious flaws in it, I'm sure you would have jumped upon
> > them.  From the lack of any kind of response I have to assume I have
> > things correct.
> 
> You mean, I need to read and answer each and every mail? I hoped that
> you might get more cooled down and reasonable again. I'm sorry that I
> was wrong.

I'm not sure in which email you think I've been hot-headed and
irrational -- from my point of view you are the one whose needs to take
a break and see a larger and broader perspective.

Again, it'd be more constructive if your emails weren't always full of
small, personal, jabs (e.g. "I hoped that you might get more cooled down ... 
I'm sorry that I was wrong".)

I could do them too but what is the point? Perhaps you attain some sense
of personal gratification? Well I hope it is more than momentary then.

> > You seem offended that that I'm pointing out that the idea is poorly
> > executed upon.
> 
> No. I just don't like it when you tell lies. You can tell your opinion
> where you want, but you must not say untrue statements and present them
> as facts.

I've told no lies.

> > There are a couple of ways to react:
> > 
> > 	- move to rectify the (perceived or actual) problem
> > 
> > 	- ignore things and hope I'll go away
> > 
> > 	- respond with (attempted) insults
> > 
> > You've done the last of those, I'm hopeful that you'll find the first
> > one more profitable and rewarding.  
> 
> As most of the readers might have noticed, we (the volatile team)
> usually respond quite fast to good ideas

Perhaps. I'll leave what other readers decide or notice up to them.  The
mailing list archives are a great testament to the speed of the volatile
group responses, and I'm sure readers don't need either of us to point out 
length of time between maintainer requests and your responses.

> However, if there is a person who can't take a No as a No, and decides
> to rather whine around, and start to tell lies, I have to take action.
> Not that I like that most, but well, I can stand that.

No, rather than 'whining' I'm taking direct, positive action:

	- I'm educating our users how to build packages themselves

	- I'm educating and explaining to our users why volatile isn't
	  useful

	- I'm working to try and get more non-security updates out
	  via stable, from which all out users can benefit.

I did, briefly, consider asking either you or the technical committee to
reconsider but I have come to the conclusion that volatile is a
technical hack around a (perceived) social problem: that it is hard to 
get non-security related updates into stable.

I believe it is more important to address that directly rather than spending 
time working around the issue and further balkanising Debian into teams 
who need to defend their 'turf'.

Cheers,
Anand

-- 
 `When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to
  its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are
  forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how
  holy the motives' -- Robert A Heinlein, "If this goes on --"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: