From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OPE5e-0005Yg-Ew for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:21:03 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 94ECBE06E8; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:20:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3AFBE08F4 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:20:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (e179011167.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.179.11.167]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D40E1B4172 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:20:38 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4C1A1312.8050500@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:20:34 +0200 From: Sebastian Pipping User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100419 Thunderbird/3.0.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo References: <4C184607.5080907@gentoo.org> <20100616074319.5263d7b5@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> <4C194CC4.3050000@gentoo.org> <20100617052411.67d0982e@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: <20100617052411.67d0982e@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 071f301d-c4fa-45ed-8cee-0b6e70435309 X-Archives-Hash: 3285b7674be3c8eae588091563fa60c7 On 06/17/10 05:24, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > Well, apart from explaining technical stuff[1] as in the example above, > we could obviously explain how our developers work, how much most of > them get payed for doing that, inform users of our services what they > can and cannot expect to get. It sounds a bit like if we explained ourselves we could continue as is instead of improving processes on our side. Maybe it would improve the whole situation a bit but it pushes away resposibility to others and it wouldn't help developer to developer conflicts either. Maybe we can still make use of that idea. Best, Sebastian