From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD2FA1396D0 for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 09:29:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6D7EFE0DF9; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 09:29:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io0-x232.google.com (mail-io0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 272B9E0DDD for ; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 09:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-x232.google.com with SMTP id j141so9866893ioj.4 for ; Sat, 09 Sep 2017 02:29:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6IiPqck5m5McQywnsFCFlh4tSJIovzjiAyQF3rChcY0=; b=WreCGYZgMql6jDO+nePmNnrA+EHXoVYZR5KGMLhqG2op4tTFJMwj6zvhnrhWv2JGt1 +XQWsTNZh/u16Cao84CV3Ys+xF4zbf3giZKA/eAQST8xWFYP6X+VeYwlqQCba8zwjooa 33t6lXIT8inZKqUgepnkyDo5lmgCHo2ePQkpS8WlOh0n9xZRTZiz4HprVkskXMnPP926 RH2Q71kI+Aasn1UTO2MP1C5+xeZ5IX/rXbxu/S5872lvhgDWlayUwwy3RLkJJ8GTpDCq P8xirW1zMClx0tJK+gX3jdvJLvAo1x4OBSnTCBO2Q49HPiQ/46M+Zvoru1NhW0dFg92T 8MBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6IiPqck5m5McQywnsFCFlh4tSJIovzjiAyQF3rChcY0=; b=CPHFRD3V6vYDydsymKIobLLj7QpHBd46sa690bGiOma03hRQxSXurweKYN33J3vuE2 /zQawVlydi6C3iwYaSyd5ZFwfhbjR/04sH3vq5BTpP6bKBSxjtnnEYKmKz0CbnDdCHIm m9PwrBmFAF1b/IVtgUQUx96LLoBqDxpJjGn2ZUNxUWqQvjJgelnQ2OYdajaFLtmWwQqh LCH66GH9KYYMkmWbke5nYzeTIpu8Im0NhEDmlsq9xtJgIhY83yCg+QWyyho/408k3dfT urH3O/L3qac1T8B1ZF0WwTgO8deLq8suRDsv+rCMqUr0Yigm8sl1+1gxX/0JkO5ecVyi 53RQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUigkBhdJqfnRGdnNp0OeT5KExrAXMmz23Rd6oxhJE1+ZbRBr25j sF30hEsRL2U68RPvMQ1jqCQuacQwVlJ1 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QCQqsZY+VhVVfiwQe/Kca22+w1eHgObwWIktHQ32UHFLwj0gl+3H8qr8PF2NT2Wk++ort/3D7ztBOg9GfhHMtg= X-Received: by 10.107.9.144 with SMTP id 16mr6605139ioj.93.1504949392776; Sat, 09 Sep 2017 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT) 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 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.36.84.212 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Sep 2017 02:29:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1504943241.15912.8.camel@gentoo.org> References: <1500969906.1206.1.camel@gentoo.org> <1504943241.15912.8.camel@gentoo.org> From: Rich Freeman Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 05:29:52 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: pgMwfsI-zvipO6_DktsAxz-SbS0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 458ccb61-4d0c-4b59-abb0-9fa3e77ffb06 X-Archives-Hash: f1ebc7c740ca2317a383c13544556cb2 On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > W dniu pi=C4=85, 08.09.2017 o godzinie 17=E2=88=B619=E2=80=89-0400, u=C5= =BCytkownik Rich Freeman > napisa=C5=82: >> >> FYI - if anybody does want to make any comments on the proposed >> devmanual changes to implement the new tags please comment at: >> >> https://github.com/gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org/pull/72 >> > > The footers were discussed to death in this very thread. I've heard your > opinions. However, as far as I'm concerned (and as I've pointed out) you > did literally *nothing* to push your ideas forward for 2+ years. > So, you read something from my comment that I didn't write, and ignored the stuff I did write. In part this is my fault, because I used sarcasm out of frustration, and that wasn't conducive to communication. To be clear: I expressed my opinions earlier in the thread as you pointed out. I have no expectation that my particular suggestion would be the one implemented. If I had felt THAT strongly about the implementation of this I'd have put it on the Council agenda or something, or at least would have discussed it in privately with you on IRC or something. Instead, once I noticed that infra had implemented some of the tag processing I switched to the format it appeared to be using in my commits. I don't expect anybody to wait for 100% consensus before doing anything around here. I think I've made that clear in plenty of posts. For significant changes there should be discussion on the lists, and then the implementer should go forward with what they see as the best implementation based on the feedback received. If somebody has a problem with it then it should be their duty to escalate it and deal with it, not make the maintainer jump through extra hoops. Certainly we shouldn't be taking every change to the Council. My concern was entirely with the attitude expressed in your comment in that pull request. If you had written "I don't think we need to go back to gentoo-dev for this one because this specific proposal was part of what was already posted there and none of the feedback really suggests a major problem with this" it wouldn't have bothered me, because as the person doing the work I think you should be afforded a bit more discretion, and this was part of your proposal. Sometimes posting on -dev elicits opinions we disagree with from people who haven't done any of the work. That should neither paralyze us, nor cause us to scoff at their suggestions. They're just words. --=20 Rich