From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JH0vB-0001JL-Jy for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:57 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 046F2E0693; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE5F8E0693 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 498E365178 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:56 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 1.267 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.267 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.801, BAYES_50=0.001, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=2.067] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IOls92WKqKUF for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D6465122 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JH0uw-0001f7-P1 for gentoo-project@gentoo.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:42 +0000 Received: from 91.84.71.162 ([91.84.71.162]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:42 +0000 Received: from slong by 91.84.71.162 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:58:42 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: Re: Re: A proposal to get out of this mess Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:05:28 +0000 Message-ID: References: <42ebd5dc0801141711m30bc22bv2721d86d81ae4990@mail.gmail.com> <478C8596.80005@gmail.com> <42ebd5dc0801150329g785478a5h7c95500d1de1dda6@mail.gmail.com> <20080115125109.13145wo79hytzfis@www2.mailstation.de> <42ebd5dc0801150505y4a355a7cx59d5ae178926d8f2@mail.gmail.com> <20080115141517.79027d1wf1obnkg8@www2.mailstation.de> <42ebd5dc0801150538oee57010g5947baee582b56fa@mail.gmail.com> <411a9f890801191507s1e845699t2e4321b6961667d6@mail.gmail.com> <411a9f890801200623o32beb65bva1ac54b534359c36@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 91.84.71.162 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: aa79c69a-c153-4268-b130-679a55c16542 X-Archives-Hash: 321d026d8f972977f52eb5928cd872c5 Daniel Butzu wrote: > > I think there is something wrong with your knode since it is putting > into my mouth some words that I didn't say. When writing a mixed reply > is not enough to mention the name of only one initial sender. Oh I'm sorry I thought you'd read the previous message. Here this should make it clearer: >>> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long >> Daniel Butzu wrote: >> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long wrote: >> > >> >> For the record: I'd still like drobbins involved, but I don't think >> >> his terms were at all reasonable, and the way he went about it was >> >> reprehensible imo. It was designed to cause the furore it did, and >> >> only makes me give credence to the argument that much of the negative >> >> press on distrowatch has come from an associate of his. It was a >> >> totally political move, and not at all motivated by concern for Gentoo >> >> afaic. If he cared that much, he'd have approached Mr Goodyear >> >> privately or on the nfp list if he wanted to be "open". Not put >> >> everyone through all this stress. >> >> >> > Maybe. However, since it caused the furore it did it seems that a lot >> > of users were unsatisfied. >> Since you ignored what "the rest of my mail was about", I included some of it, and expanded on it to explain what I meant. Sorry for your confusion. In this mail anything starting >> or '>> >>' is mine. >> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long >> >> > Users used to feel just as excluded when drobbins was in charge >> There appears to be some myth going round that everything was sweetness >> and light back in those days; it's not true, and further the distro was >> an absolute pig to maintain: >> "I used Gentoo when it was version 0.7, which was omg >> broken. Packages were added to portage and this would be stable, that >> would not compile at all. Then you had to re-sync to compile it, so in a >> day, you would need to re-sync portage 3 or 4 times to get everything to >> compile. :P ..Even still back in the 1.4 days, people really had no idea >> what to do." >> >> Daniel Butzu wrote: >> > You can't stir up something when there is nothing to stir up. >> >> Actually I think this whole drama shows that you can, or at least you can >> draw attention to one thing (lack of paperwork) and pretend it means >> something else (Gentoo is dying! Again!) People like drama. >> >> Daniel Butzu wrote: >> > So maybe we should focus more on our problems today, since we were >> > unable of doing it yesterday. >> >> Er yeah, maybe you'd like to discuss those then? That was what the rest >> of my mail was about. >> As in: >> > On 1/19/08, Steve Long >> >> I've openly stated that I think user involvement and conduct on the >> >> dev m-l are the biggest problems I see. >> >> As in, how do we constructively change those? Or do you believe that can >> only be done by drobbins taking exclusive ownership of everyone's code? >> HTH, steveL: looking forward to your points. -- gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org mailing list