RE: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

RE: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[burlingk]

Ok, my two cents on the matter.

I am still new enough to the community to be considered an outsider,
so here is an outsider's perspective.  I hope not to step on toes, 
but it will probably happen anyway.

First:  Cosmetic things, i.e. user interface issues, pretty pictures, 
and things that effect the overall look and feel.

If they do not stop the program from functioning, they are not high 
priority.  It may be agitating to look at, but it is not a bug.
However,
This does not prevent you from putting in feedback, or even working
on patches to change the offending behavior.  Just don't expect cosmetic
issues to be high priority to anyone other than the person submitting
the feedback.  There honestly are things out there that are thoroughly
broken that need to be repaired first.  I am guessing however that in
the case of emerge, if you understand python (or even know enough to
pick
through the code a bit) that you can probably fix the issue yourself,
and 
submit the fix.
:-)

Second:  Bug reports for real bugs.
Bug reports need to be thorough.  If they do not provide enough
information
to reproduce a bug, or at least explain exactly what is going on, then
it is
hard for the developers and bug squashers to do anything about it.  It
may
seem to you like they are "not doing their job" by not researching it,
then
conceder this.  When you submit a bug, it is YOUR bug, not theirs.  You
have
the primary responsibility for making sure they know what you are
talking about.
In the case listed in this thread, when the second bug was submitted
including
a more thorough description, and the research that had been done, it was
taken care of promptly.  A bug report is a good thing, but if they can't
reproduce it, and don't have enough information to know what the problem
is,
they can't fix it.

Third, and maybe most important:  Configuration Issues.
Many developers try to make sure to cover as many bases as they can when
it comes to developing their software.  For many applications, the vast
majority of users will have a fairly standard setup.  While this is not
always the case, you need to conceder that many open source and free
software
applications are written first and foremost for the needs of the author.
While this may sound a little callous or selfish, remember one thing.
Free And Open Source Software is developed by volonteers, who also have
real world jobs and lives.  They develop tools that make their lives
easier, and they share.  They do not all have thousands of dollars to
spend
on investigating every possible platform that their program may be
expected
to run on.  Mounting your config files for firefox from a coda file
system
is far from standard in anyone's books.  If you know how to add that
functionality without breaking anything that is already there, then
write
the patch and submit it.  If not, then submit a thurough bug report, or 
a general request in the appropriate forums or mainling lists.  Let them
know exactly what your problem is, and what you would like done.  Be
polite,
and be patient.  If they do not bite the first try, it is not a personal
snub.

Most of us have never run into problems with firefox.  And honestly, if
the
idea of creating a new profile would not work for you, then recreating
your firefox directory, with "physical" copies of the symlinked files
would
do the trick as well.  I know that does not address the issue of running
the
Config files from a coda system, but it would get things working under 
normal circumstances.

I have lurked long enough to see a number of posts complaining about the
bug
Tracking system.  In most cases the people complaining were hateful and
said
very little that was useful.  They generaly stuck to name calling and
the like.
This is not to say they all did, but most. :/  I am sure that eventually
I will
have to submit a bug, and I may find myself having to hold my tongue to
apply
what I have seen here, but I will try to be understanding about it.

To be honest, this is probably not the forum to complain about bug
reports.
Complaining about bugs is probably not bad though.  It might be a good
source
of feedback to see if other people are having the same problem, or at
least
to get a general idea of how to format and word your bug before you
actually
submit it. ^_^

Basic summary:
There are a lot of tools at your disposal.  Know them, use them, love
them. :)
If you have problems with one of those tools, by all means ask
questions. :)
The Free Software and Open Source communities are run primarily by
volonteers.
Remember that when you are deciding how to approach them.  Imagine if
you just 
sunk three years into a project, and suddenly someone started attacking
you 
because it didn't work perfectly on their system.
Remember, bug reports take time.  Track your bug, update your bug, make
sure to
keep the bug propperly fed or it might die.

--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* burlingk@cv63.navy.mil <burlingk@cv63.navy.mil> wrote:

Hi,

> First:  Cosmetic things, i.e. user interface issues, pretty 
> pictures, and things that effect the overall look and feel.
> 
> If they do not stop the program from functioning, they are 
> not high priority.  It may be agitating to look at, but it 
> is not a bug.

Isnt that what the severity "enhancement" is for ?

> Second:  Bug reports for real bugs.
> Bug reports need to be thorough.  If they do not provide enough
> information to reproduce a bug, or at least explain exactly what 
> is going on, then it is hard for the developers and bug squashers 
> to do anything about it. 

Sometimes, as the reported, you miss some important things. Okay. 
Then the wrangler (or whom else works onthr bug) simply should ask
for more information. 

But if your bugs are always marked as invalid, you loose any 
motiviation for further contributions. Bug reports are also 
contribution.

> Mounting your config files for firefox from a coda file 
> system is far from standard in anyone's books.  

Maybe. And maybe I'm almost alone with using Coda on Gentoo,
since the ebuilds are still very, very old.

But did anyone ask why I'm using symlinks in my ff profile, 
or why the permission test might failed. Or did anyone tell 
"hey, be careful about [...], we need it fo [...]" ? 

No. The whole issue was simply declared invalid.

> if the idea of creating a new profile would not work for you, 
> then recreating your firefox directory, with "physical" copies 
> of the symlinked files would do the trick as well. 

Not really. The symlinks are no problem for FF, it works perfectly 
well. And I *need* them to store temporary stuff locally.
It's mozilla-launcher which artificially breaks if it *thinks*
something could be wrong.

> Imagine if you just sunk three years into a project, and suddenly 
> someone started attacking you because it didn't work perfectly on 
> their system.

Well, I'm working on lots of OSS projects for many many years.
But I never ever felt being attacked by an bug report. 


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[burlingk]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Enrico Weigelt [mailto:weigelt@metux.de] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 8:00 AM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid
> 
> 
> * burlingk@cv63.navy.mil <burlingk@cv63.navy.mil> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > Second:  Bug reports for real bugs.
> > Bug reports need to be thorough.  If they do not provide enough 
> > information to reproduce a bug, or at least explain exactly what is 
> > going on, then it is hard for the developers and bug 
> squashers to do 
> > anything about it.
> 
> Sometimes, as the reported, you miss some important things. Okay. 
> Then the wrangler (or whom else works onthr bug) simply 
> should ask for more information. 
> 
> But if your bugs are always marked as invalid, you loose any 
> motiviation for further contributions. Bug reports are also 
> contribution.

I can't really argue that one.  I would also admit that I personally
tend to be a lot more patient in weedling information out of an
end user.  Comes from tech support training.  Do remember though that
a lot of techies are not people persons (I know that is not a great
excuse, or even good grammar).  The founders of the open source movement
were notorious jerks. :P  It is a matter of recorded fact.  They
Focused more on the software and let their friends handle the people.

> > if the idea of creating a new profile would not work for you,
> > then recreating your firefox directory, with "physical" copies 
> > of the symlinked files would do the trick as well. 
> 
> Not really. The symlinks are no problem for FF, it works perfectly 
> well. And I *need* them to store temporary stuff locally.
> It's mozilla-launcher which artificially breaks if it 
> *thinks* something could be wrong.


Personally, I don't realy know WHAT mozilla-launcher is I think.  :P
I have always just created shortcuts to firefox directly, and let it
handle everything itself.

> > Imagine if you just sunk three years into a project, and suddenly
> > someone started attacking you because it didn't work perfectly on 
> > their system.

> Well, I'm working on lots of OSS projects for many many 
> years. But I never ever felt being attacked by an bug report. 

It is not the bug report that is the attack. It is the angry
declarations
of incompetense.  The insistance that because you do not agree, that
something
must be wrong with the developers.  The fact that in just a handful of
hours
working with a complicated issue, you declared the community at large to
be hostile and ignorant.

That is just what I have seen from this situation.  It is not the fact
that
you submit bugs, it is the way in which you do it.


--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

> > > Bug reports need to be thorough.  If they do not provide enough
> > > information to reproduce a bug, or at least explain exactly what is
> > > going on, then it is hard for the developers and bug
> > squashers to do
> > > anything about it.
> >
> > Sometimes, as the reported, you miss some important things. Okay.
> > Then the wrangler (or whom else works onthr bug) simply
> > should ask for more information.
> >
> > But if your bugs are always marked as invalid, you loose any
> > motiviation for further contributions. Bug reports are also
> > contribution.

Imo, provide as much information as possible, describe all paths of
logic, dont assume bugwranglers are psychic. Verbosity can be your
friend.
If its marked invalid, then either they've given a damn good reason,
or you've not given them a better one not to mark it invalid. In
either case, if its invalid, keep posting as much information as
possible on the subject, not just the what, but the why.
I'm still at a loss why theres any need for symlinks to the coda FS
when you could just tell firefox to build a profile /directly/ on that
coda-fs.
Im not saying there is no valid reason, just there has yet to be a
good explanation as to why.
If you can't on your own convince a dev to change a bugs status, find
other people with  similar problems to increase the validity of your
claim. Bugs can be like a court room. No witnesses & no good evidence,
a poor testimony, and you end up in jail. So you get all the evidence
you can, get your witnesses, make a nice logical argument, and with
any luck, the wrangler might reinstate its free status ( cos being
invalid dosn't mean that the CC list will suddenly stop working afaik
)

> I can't really argue that one.  I would also admit that I personally
> tend to be a lot more patient in weedling information out of an
> end user.  Comes from tech support training.  Do remember though that
> a lot of techies are not people persons (I know that is not a great
> excuse, or even good grammar).  The founders of the open source movement
> were notorious jerks. :P  It is a matter of recorded fact.  They
> Focused more on the software and let their friends handle the people.

I sympathize with them. The reason devs often tend to be jerks, is
because people of lesser understanding often be as big a jerk when
they envisage a problem which is really a case of "problem exists
between keyboard and chair" or a case of "its not our fault, its
somebody elses", and sadly for devs, there are an awful lot of people
who know very little yet profess to know very much. ( Evidence? in
high school i had one teacher tell me off for doing on a computer
something another teacher had told me to  do, because the one of
lesser understanding didn't obviously have a clue what i was doing,
and thus made drastic assumptions that i was 'writing viruses and
hacking' ....  and that was before I ever did any /real/ programming
work :/ ... work in a company where you have customers, you'll
probably find complications with 'customer doesn't understand, and
thus we have to start again to fix a non-problem' )


> > > if the idea of creating a new profile would not work for you,
> > > then recreating your firefox directory, with "physical" copies
> > > of the symlinked files would do the trick as well.
> >
> > Not really. The symlinks are no problem for FF, it works perfectly
> > well. And I *need* them to store temporary stuff locally.
> > It's mozilla-launcher which artificially breaks if it
> > *thinks* something could be wrong.
>
>
> Personally, I don't realy know WHAT mozilla-launcher is I think.  :P
> I have always just created shortcuts to firefox directly, and let it
> handle everything itself.
>
> > > Imagine if you just sunk three years into a project, and suddenly
> > > someone started attacking you because it didn't work perfectly on
> > > their system.
>
> > Well, I'm working on lots of OSS projects for many many
> > years. But I never ever felt being attacked by an bug report.
>
> It is not the bug report that is the attack. It is the angry
> declarations
> of incompetense.  The insistance that because you do not agree, that
> something
> must be wrong with the developers.  The fact that in just a handful of
> hours
> working with a complicated issue, you declared the community at large to
> be hostile and ignorant.

Community is developer oriented, and thus, nasties and arrogance will abound =).
Just look in -dev for your daily dose of flame war/soap opera. ( if
your going to have a 100+ message  flamewar that started from somebody
complaining and missunderstanding an 'inside' joke, it looks kinda
evident that some devs love arguing for the sake of it... so with that
in mind, play safe, be nice :) )

>
> That is just what I have seen from this situation.  It is not the fact
> that
> you submit bugs, it is the way in which you do it.
>
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

In favour of what Enrico did, although for all the world it seems like
he fought a bit and went against advice, he found a problem, and
provided the means for a solution, and placed it in bugzilla. Despite
it being marked invalid, that bug will remain in there for the rest of
the natural life of bugzilla, and if anyone else out there /does/ have
the misfortune of having the same problem later, they'll find it ( cos
they look hard ), try it, see it work, and say 'thanks enrico for
fixing  my problem' on the bottom. When that happens, maybe it might
get migrated from being invalid, and somebody may consider changing it
for the better, which is one of the fundemental benefits of OSS. You
dont have to actually commit the bugfix into upstream to do a world of
difference :)

-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Kent Fredric <kentfredric@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

> Imo, provide as much information as possible, describe all 
> paths of logic, dont assume bugwranglers are psychic. Verbosity 
> can be your friend.

I understand that often there's more information need. But isn't 
this exactly what the NEEDINFO status is for ? 

If, for example, my mozilla-launcher bug would have been marked 
as NEEDINFO, it would have been totally clear that I just have to
tell a little bit more about my problem. 

But this wasn't the case. The bug was simply marked as invalid. 
So the message is: "not an Gentoo problem - your fault".

I have the strange feeling, certain wranglers see b.g.o as an 
helpdesk system, not an place for reporting and discussing about
problems. 

> I'm still at a loss why theres any need for symlinks to the 
> coda FS when you could just tell firefox to build a profile 
> /directly/ on that coda-fs.

a) The profile *is* on Coda. Problem #1: Coda's permission handling 
   is different than in traditional Unix. ls -la may not show not 
   that username/uid the mozilla-launcher scripts expects to see. 
   Looking on owner-uid and mode simply isn't an reliable source
   on ACLs. This is not really Coda specific.

b) I'm using the symlinks to get temporary data out of the Coda,
   back to the local disk. Simply for reducnig traffic + latencies.
   Also not Coda specific, but generally for network filesystems.
   Of course it would be easier, if FF simply wouldn't store 
   temporary stuff within the profile, but where it belongs ($TMP).
   But symlinks for good for all Mozilla apps.

> If you can't on your own convince a dev to change a bugs status, 
> find other people with  similar problems to increase the validity 
> of your claim. 

I won't more time on that issue. It's fixed for me.

BTW: if the devs would come to the conclusion that they don't have 
and good solution or don't feed the need to fix it in reasonable
time, why isn't the bug status "LATER" or "WONTFIX" ?

<snip>

> Just look in -dev for your daily dose of flame war/soap opera. ( if
> your going to have a 100+ message  flamewar that started from somebody
> complaining and missunderstanding an 'inside' joke, it looks kinda
> evident that some devs love arguing for the sake of it... so with that
> in mind, play safe, be nice :) )

Well, I'm involved in many projects, subscribed in uncountable maillists.
I never ever seen such an high flamewar level as @g.o. And I can't 
remember on any personal attacks nor arguments like doing sth some way
just to be different.

> In favour of what Enrico did, although for all the world it seems like
> he fought a bit and went against advice, he found a problem, and
> provided the means for a solution, and placed it in bugzilla. 

> Despite it being marked invalid, that bug will remain in there for 
> the rest of the natural life of bugzilla, and if anyone else out 
> there /does/ have the misfortune of having the same problem later, 
> they'll find it 

Since I learned what's going on @bgo, that's the only reason why I 
post there. Just for the records, so other people can find it there.
I'd never ever expect the devs to take up any bit. 

My idealism from the first days is all lost. Obviously none of my 
help is ever wanted, so I go my own way and leave them alone. 
I continue maintaining my own overlay and regularily announcing
it via press releases, etc.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

Enrico Weigelt ha scritto:
> I understand that often there's more information need. But isn't 
> this exactly what the NEEDINFO status is for ? 

You don't understand that perhaps the wrangler does not understand that
needs more info!
If he has a partial/distorted view of the bug, you can't expect he
*knows* his view is partial/distorted.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Davi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1283 bytes --]

Em Quarta 06 Junho 2007 20:10, Enrico Weigelt escreveu:
> * Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
> > > Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate
> > > bugs to the responsible persons ?
> >
> > and bug wranglers are just humans. And humans a) are not perfect
> > and b) sometimes make errors.
>
> Ok, no problem. But is that the fault of the reporter ? Obviously not.
> If a bug gets to the wrong dev, he simply kicks it back or directly
> to the right person. Trivial.

Yes. This is trivial! =D

Gentoo's Project needs more people to help in develop, docs and bugs... =)

IF this (bugs) are, as YOU said, trivial, go on... Help them... Teach them
 the right way! =)

The community would apreciate... =)

Sorry the *very* poor english...


--
Davi Vidal
davividal@siscompar.com.br
davividal@gmail.com
--
"Religion, ideology, resources, land,
spite, love or "just because"...
No matter how pathetic the reason,
it's enough to start a war. "
--------------------------------------------------------
Por favor não faça top-posting, coloque a sua resposta abaixo desta linha.
Please don't do top-posting, put your reply below the following line.
--------------------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Davi <davividal@siscompar.com.br> wrote:

Hi,

> Gentoo's Project needs more people to help in develop, 
> docs and bugs... =)

Well, for me, it seemed quite different - new people are 
unwelcomed, especially if the come with new/different ideas.
 
> IF this (bugs) are, as YOU said, trivial, go on... Help them... 

I did. But I had to learn that this is totally unwelcomed.

> Teach them the right way! =)

No, I'm not the one who teaches anyody. I go my way, if you
like it, feel free to follow me, if you don't like it, 
go you own but leave me alone. 

I've shown several problems and concepts, but I was immediately
attacked. So the message is clear: I'm unwelcomed. 

I don't see any reason for wasting more time on those folks. 
That's the reason why I usually don't post on -dev anymore. 
I still post on -users for those people who still might be 
interested. 


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

Enrico Weigelt ha scritto:

> No, I'm not the one who teaches anyody. I go my way, if you
> like it, feel free to follow me, if you don't like it, 
> go you own but leave me alone. 

So don't expect anyone to like you, if you don't teach anyone what do
you think and...-->

> I've shown several problems and concepts, but I was immediately
> attacked. So the message is clear: I'm unwelcomed. 

--> you don't defend it seriously.
Really. If you think there's a problem, explain it. You get attacked?
Insist. Prove them they are wrong. Do your best, politely but firmly.
Accept the fact you are discussing -people maybe attack you simply
because they don't understand at first time and, guess what, this could
be also your fault, not only them.

If you don't insist and make no further attemps, how do you expect
people understand? Do you think we can read your mind?

> I don't see any reason for wasting more time on those folks. 
> That's the reason why I usually don't post on -dev anymore. 
> I still post on -users for those people who still might be 
> interested. 

If that's your attitude, you can even unsubscribe users, and leave us
alone.
I hope you change your mind (I doubt it but...)

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

> > No, I'm not the one who teaches anyody. I go my way, if you
> > like it, feel free to follow me, if you don't like it, 
> > go you own but leave me alone. 
> 
> So don't expect anyone to like you, if you don't teach anyone what do
> you think and...-->

hmmpf, you probably misunderstood :(

Teaching somebody (IMHO) is too much about being right and
intelligent the one to be teached being wrong and unintelligent.
It's about pulling your oppinion into someone else.
I don't like that (although I still do it too much ;-o).

I'd prefer telling people what I (personally) believe it's good/right
and give them the chance to either take or leave it. Both decisions
will have their consequences, but nobody can tell which one is 
objectively better - evryhing's subjective.

Okay, this is really getting in philophical topics liek god vs. satan ;-o
(--> getting too offtopic ?)

> > I've shown several problems and concepts, but I was immediately
> > attacked. So the message is clear: I'm unwelcomed. 
> 
> --> you don't defend it seriously.

I don't feel to defend anything against anyone. At least not in such
technically debates. I've got my arguments and solutions. Feel free to
either follow them or leave them alone. You also can put your own
against, and so we can discuss. 

> Really. If you think there's a problem, explain it. 

In case of the mozilla-launcher bug, I did explain it. And I found an 
quick and dirty solution for me. Not a clean one, but it's a start.
We had several better ideas in this thread, which should be discussed. 
But as long as the bug is marked invalid, I have to assume that debate
is unwelcomed and so won't invest much more resouces in that.

> You get attacked? Insist. Prove them they are wrong. Do your best, 
> politely but firmly.

Well, of course we're all conditioned on defending if we're attacked, 
probably generic. But I really don't see I anytings to gain here 
than maybe my honour in such an unimportant place like bgo.

> Accept the fact you are discussing -people maybe attack you simply
> because they don't understand at first time and, guess what, this 
> could be also your fault, not only them.

Maybe it's my fault if some people doesn't understand my bug reports.
But it's their fault if they declare my reports as invalid w/o asking
back, ranting against me, try to convince me to go away, etc

I had to learn that bgo is clearly not the place for an open and 
cooperative working on problems, if you're not an Gentoo cleric.
So I've got my conclusions and work alone. Maybe some people come
around and say, against Gentoo, but that's not true - just beyond 
Gentoo. (If they really believe in that, well I'll leave them with
that - I'm not the one who wants to have anything to do with such
religious stuff)
 
> > I don't see any reason for wasting more time on those folks. 
> > That's the reason why I usually don't post on -dev anymore. 
> > I still post on -users for those people who still might be 
> > interested. 
> 
> If that's your attitude, you can even unsubscribe users, and 
> leave us alone.

The users list ist neither the devs list (where I also dont waste 
my time anymore), nor bgo. Maybe here still are some people who're 
interested in my contribution. But if a large majority tells me 
to stop and go away, I'll do so.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

Enrico Weigelt ha scritto:

> I'd prefer telling people what I (personally) believe it's good/right
> and give them the chance to either take or leave it. Both decisions
> will have their consequences, but nobody can tell which one is 
> objectively better - evryhing's subjective.
[...]
> I don't feel to defend anything against anyone. At least not in such
> technically debates. I've got my arguments and solutions. Feel free to
> either follow them or leave them alone. You also can put your own
> against, and so we can discuss.

Your problem is: you live in the delusion that if you write thing X,
people immediately understand X and either refuse it or accept it.

People do not work that way (no, you neither).

If you write thing X and X is not blatantly, utmostly trivially obvious
(and even in this case) most people will NOT understand it. For example,
I am explaining to you this concept right now, and I see you have an
hard time grasping it. You see?

So you have to explain it again and to "defend" your opinion in the
sense that you have to nail into the head of the relevant people that
you're right (or nail into yours that you are wrong).

If the world was like you think it is, it would probably be better. But
not being so, it's not surprising that you feel "refused" by it.

> Okay, this is really getting in philophical topics liek god vs. satan ;-o
> (--> getting too offtopic ?)

Yeah, but I like it. :)

 > In case of the mozilla-launcher bug, I did explain it. And I found an
> quick and dirty solution for me. Not a clean one, but it's a start.
> We had several better ideas in this thread, which should be discussed. 
> But as long as the bug is marked invalid, I have to assume that debate
> is unwelcomed and so won't invest much more resouces in that.

No, you have to assume that people upstream have not understood why the
bug is valid.
The conversation was:
enrico: hey, there's bug X in package Y when doing Z
bugwrangler: (giving just a fast glance) hmmm, doesn't look like a bug.
maybe better avoiding wasting time.
enrico: oh, don't you think it's a bug? F**K YOU MORONS ME IS WASTING TIME.

Now the RIGHT reply would be:
enrico: ehm, no. you misunderstand me, probably. it's REALLY a bug for
those reasons. i'll try to be even more clear now...blah,blah...you see
it now?
b.w.: still not convinced
enrico: (repeat until convince someone or you are forced to give up)

> Well, of course we're all conditioned on defending if we're attacked, 
> probably generic. But I really don't see I anytings to gain here 
> than maybe my honour in such an unimportant place like bgo.

That's where you are wrong, and that's why I still insist answering to
this thread. If you insist:
- you get all the community aware that there is a bug
- you could get the bug fixed
- Gentoo is better
That's why it is important. Frankly I don't care that much about your
honour :), but I care about Gentoo. It's my OS, I want it better.

> Maybe it's my fault if some people doesn't understand my bug reports.
> But it's their fault if they declare my reports as invalid w/o asking
> back, ranting against me, try to convince me to go away, etc

If they don't understand them, how can it be their fault? Garbage input
--> garbage output.

> I had to learn that bgo is clearly not the place for an open and 
> cooperative working on problems, if you're not an Gentoo cleric.

Too strange I am not a "Gentoo cleric" and I had exactly the opposite
experience.

> So I've got my conclusions and work alone. Maybe some people come
> around and say, against Gentoo, but that's not true - just beyond 
> Gentoo. (If they really believe in that, well I'll leave them with
> that - I'm not the one who wants to have anything to do with such
> religious stuff)

This, I agree. But working alone helps no one apart from you and a bunch
of guys that agree with you. Plus, sometimes you could actually be
wrong. Discussing your patches with people could always be helpful.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

> Your problem is: you live in the delusion that if you write thing X,
> people immediately understand X and either refuse it or accept it.

Isn't there an third state: "I didn't really understand what it's 
about - please explain" ?

Can't speak for others, but my world isn't binary ;-P

> If you write thing X and X is not blatantly, utmostly trivially obvious
> (and even in this case) most people will NOT understand it. For example,
> I am explaining to you this concept right now, and I see you have an
> hard time grasping it. You see?

IMHO, I do understand what you're talking about, but I don't aggree.
Of course people cannot understand evrything. But they should at least
understand if they do understand the issue or need it to be some bit
more explained. 

Let's take an different part of life, not computers, take policits.
I'm an elected representative. I have to decide lots of things here.
Normally somebody brings some proposable we should vote on. Usually 
we talk about it before the vote (yeah, many people try to get their
issues stamped w/o discussions before complaints could be raised ;-O)
If I didn't fully understand the issue, I simply ask before voting.
Issues don't get kicked off the agenda (aka marked INVALID) because 
the chairmain does not understand the whole thing. We rarely have 
cases where we actually don't want to vote on specific things due 
missing information or waiting for certain events. So we (by a vote)
take it from the agenda for a while and take it back ofter some time
(aka status NEEDINFO or LATER).

We don't have something like bgz for that. Just pen+paper. But it 
works quite good.

> So you have to explain it again and to "defend" your opinion in the
> sense that you have to nail into the head of the relevant people that
> you're right (or nail into yours that you are wrong).

No that's really not what I'd call "defend". Maybe you can have to 
defend some opinion, ie. if votes on certain decisions are running
(I want feature XYZ, or ABC should get in, etc). But on reporting 
an problem there's nothing to defend. It's just an (personal) report,
no decision, nothing to vote.

> > Okay, this is really getting in philophical topics liek god vs. satan ;-o
> > (--> getting too offtopic ?)
> 
> Yeah, but I like it. :)

Of course we can talk about it, but I'm not sure if this list is the
right place for that. Comments from others ? 

> > In case of the mozilla-launcher bug, I did explain it. And I found an
> > quick and dirty solution for me. Not a clean one, but it's a start.
> > We had several better ideas in this thread, which should be discussed. 
> > But as long as the bug is marked invalid, I have to assume that debate
> > is unwelcomed and so won't invest much more resouces in that.
> 
> No, you have to assume that people upstream have not understood why the
> bug is valid.
> The conversation was:
> enrico: hey, there's bug X in package Y when doing Z
> bugwrangler: (giving just a fast glance) hmmm, doesn't look like a bug.
> maybe better avoiding wasting time.

So he decided altough he should *KNOW* that he's missing necessary info.
The right action would have been marking NEEDINFO instead of INVALID.

> enrico: oh, don't you think it's a bug? F**K YOU MORONS ME IS WASTING TIME.

That's just because he always declared my bugs invalid. 
So the message is "we're not interested in any of your reports".

> Now the RIGHT reply would be:
> enrico: ehm, no. you misunderstand me, probably. it's REALLY a bug for
> those reasons. i'll try to be even more clear now...blah,blah...you see
> it now?
> b.w.: still not convinced
> enrico: (repeat until convince someone or you are forced to give up)

That would be correct, if the bug had been marked NEEDINFO.

> > Well, of course we're all conditioned on defending if we're attacked, 
> > probably generic. But I really don't see I anytings to gain here 
> > than maybe my honour in such an unimportant place like bgo.
> 
> That's where you are wrong, and that's why I still insist answering to
> this thread. If you insist:
> - you get all the community aware that there is a bug
> - you could get the bug fixed
> - Gentoo is better
> That's why it is important. Frankly I don't care that much about your
> honour :), but I care about Gentoo. It's my OS, I want it better.

Well, in priciple I agree, but I'm really not willing in running 
against a wall over and over. If the people in charge don't show 
the slightest interest in my contributions, I don't see any reason
for wasting more time.

> But working alone helps no one apart from you and a bunch of 
> guys that agree with you. 

I don't have a problem with that. My fixes are working for me,
and if helps others and contribute, its nice. If not, it doesn't
actually matter.

> Discussing your patches with people could always be helpful.

Yes, that's why I'm posting them on this list.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/13/07, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> * b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let's take an different part of life, not computers, take policits.
> I'm an elected representative. I have to decide lots of things here.
> Normally somebody brings some proposable we should vote on. Usually
> we talk about it before the vote (yeah, many people try to get their
> issues stamped w/o discussions before complaints could be raised ;-O)
> If I didn't fully understand the issue, I simply ask before voting.
> Issues don't get kicked off the agenda (aka marked INVALID) because
> the chairmain does not understand the whole thing. We rarely have
> cases where we actually don't want to vote on specific things due
> missing information or waiting for certain events. So we (by a vote)
> take it from the agenda for a while and take it back ofter some time
> (aka status NEEDINFO or LATER).
>
> We don't have something like bgz for that. Just pen+paper. But it
> works quite good.

Politics analogy breaks apart here on one point. In politics, you
don't have several thousand proposals a day. If Politics did have that
many proposals, and just any man & his dog could make a proposal, all
the ones with NEEDINFO would grow faster than the heap of dung @ a
sewage treatment station, and the percentage processed would get
progressively a smaller percentile, and governments with all their
bureaucratic red tape would get less done than they already do.

Im guessing if they had as many proposal as BGO does,  they would ,
like BGO, employ staff to filter the rubbish out. ( Cos you see,
BugWranglers are not your head heirachy, they're just the entry level
cleaner/rep who relays the information ), and that way, 10 year olds
who want something for Christmas won't put his request onto the daily
agenda and waste time. That way duplicate propositions are found and
associated as such. That way proposals which dont even have enough
info to get to council cos they cant hold their own water, or are
obviously bogus ( ie: i propose we nuke ourselves ) or proposals which
obviously don't affect a large enough part of the population ,  don't
inundate the council and waste  their time with unimportant issues,
due to them not having a lot of free time.

All you can do is be insistent and give more info, and keep
un-invalidating them, and they'll eventually listen, or find another
dev ( politician/rep/senator ) who will add weight to your claim and
delegate it  to the right place.

Outside that,   you can be a vigilante, and take the law into your own hands.

Thats all there is to it :)


-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

Hi folks,

just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's 
maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again: 
Critical bugs are simply declared invalid. 

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935

Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".

Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.

BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested,
give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Dienstag, 5. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's
> maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again:
> Critical bugs are simply declared invalid.
>
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935
>
> Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".
>
> Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.
>
> BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested,
> give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time.
>

so first you went to the wrong bugzilla and made a big fuss.

Then you went to the gentoo-bugzilla and made even more fuss.

And in less than a day you have concluded that nobody is interessted in your 
problem or patch.

You are really fast - but have you ever tried to create a NEW PROFILE WITH THE 
CORRECT DIR INSTEAD OF SYMLINKS? NO?

So why are you complaining?

Just start firefox with firefox -Profilemanager

Oh, and retry. Maybe adding the author of mozilla-launcher to the bug? 
Because, you know, the bugwranglers aren't perfect-all-knowing persons - and 
you are so smart, you should be able to find the dev who is responsible for 
mozilla-launcher...

For the rest - a typical Enrico-mail. Please don't stop. Go on, nothing to see 
here.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

<snip>
 
> so first you went to the wrong bugzilla and made a big fuss.
> Then you went to the gentoo-bugzilla and made even more fuss.

Yes, I first expected it to be an firefox bug, so I filed the bug there.
After I found out that the ff source didn't contain that error message,
I had I look elsewhere and learned that it's produced by an Gentoo 
specific script coming from another package. So I filed the bug there.

BTW: what do you exactly mean with "made a big fuss" ? 

> And in less than a day you have concluded that nobody is interessted 
> in your problem or patch.

Yes, because certain (responsible) people directly expressed it to me,
again (as usual).

<snip>
 
> You are really fast - but have you ever tried to create a NEW PROFILE 
> WITH THE CORRECT DIR INSTEAD OF SYMLINKS? NO?

That's far, far away from my problem. I do not need any new profile, 
and the profile is okay. The symlinks have to be there, explicitly.
Firefox does not have any slightest problem with that. (why should it ?)
It's Gentoo's "mozilla-launcher", which introduces that problem. 

> Just start firefox with firefox -Profilemanager

And then ? 
Hope that mozilla-launcher gets repaired by itself ?

> Oh, and retry. Maybe adding the author of mozilla-launcher to the bug?

Do I have permission for that ? That's new to me.
 
> Because, you know, the bugwranglers aren't perfect-all-knowing persons 
> - and you are so smart, you should be able to find the dev who is responsible 
> for mozilla-launcher...

Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate bugs to the
responsible persons ? 

Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of specific 
persons ;-O
 
> For the rest - a typical Enrico-mail. Please don't stop. Go on, nothing 
> to see here.

Yeah, I already know you don't like me. I dont care.


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Mittwoch, 6. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > so first you went to the wrong bugzilla and made a big fuss.
> > Then you went to the gentoo-bugzilla and made even more fuss.
>
> Yes, I first expected it to be an firefox bug, so I filed the bug there.
> After I found out that the ff source didn't contain that error message,
> I had I look elsewhere and learned that it's produced by an Gentoo
> specific script coming from another package. So I filed the bug there.
>
> BTW: what do you exactly mean with "made a big fuss" ?
>
> > And in less than a day you have concluded that nobody is interessted
> > in your problem or patch.
>
> Yes, because certain (responsible) people directly expressed it to me,
> again (as usual).
>
> <snip>
>
> > You are really fast - but have you ever tried to create a NEW PROFILE
> > WITH THE CORRECT DIR INSTEAD OF SYMLINKS? NO?
>
> That's far, far away from my problem. I do not need any new profile,
> and the profile is okay. The symlinks have to be there, explicitly.
> Firefox does not have any slightest problem with that. (why should it ?)
> It's Gentoo's "mozilla-launcher", which introduces that problem.
>
> > Just start firefox with firefox -Profilemanager
>
> And then ?
> Hope that mozilla-launcher gets repaired by itself ?

no? but if it works that way, it is not even defective..

>
> > Oh, and retry. Maybe adding the author of mozilla-launcher to the bug?
>
> Do I have permission for that ? That's new to me.
>
> > Because, you know, the bugwranglers aren't perfect-all-knowing persons
> > - and you are so smart, you should be able to find the dev who is
> > responsible for mozilla-launcher...
>
> Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate bugs to the
> responsible persons ?


and bug wranglers are just humans. And humans a) are not perfect and b) 
sometimes make errors.

>
> Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of specific
> persons ;-O

well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes them too 
fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a civil manner usually 
solves that.

>
> > For the rest - a typical Enrico-mail. Please don't stop. Go on, nothing
> > to see here.
>
> Yeah, I already know you don't like me. I dont care.

no, I don't like the manner you regularly make a lot of noise about nothing.

I don't know you, so I can't know if I like you or not.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:


> > And then ?
> > Hope that mozilla-launcher gets repaired by itself ?
> 
> no? but if it works that way, it is not even defective..

It doesn't. Why do you assume it would ? 

<snip>

> > Isn't it exactly the job of the bugwranglers to delegate 
> > bugs to the responsible persons ?
> 
> and bug wranglers are just humans. And humans a) are not perfect 
> and b) sometimes make errors.

Ok, no problem. But is that the fault of the reporter ? Obviously not.
If a bug gets to the wrong dev, he simply kicks it back or directly
to the right person. Trivial.

> > Sometimes it seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of 
> > specific persons ;-O
> 
> well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes 
> them too fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a 
> civil manner usually solves that.

I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions 
at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> seems, certain wranglers are for killing bugs of
>
> > > specific persons ;-O
> >
> > well, Jakub is very fast closing bugs - and sometimes he closes
> > them too fast... this is nothing new - and arguing with him in a
> > civil manner usually solves that.
>
> I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).

because it is their job to filter out noise so 'real' devs can concentrate on 
the 'real' bugs. They are the first line of defence. And since bug wranglers 
are humans, they can't know everything and sometimes they make a mistake. Bug 
wranglers are the first filter, if the bug is not assigned to a team. And 
sometimes, they filter things, that should not be filtered out. Stay calm, 
explain the situation - and in my experience it will resolved. But having a 
fit on this ml does not help anybody - it just looks bad. And it makes YOU 
look bad.

I have been at the wrong end of bug wranglers (Moc) and java devs (when I 
complained years ago, that updating one java vm, would change the user vm, 
even if that package would be unaffected. For example user vm sun, update of 
blackdown vm, user vm now blackdown vm. It took a lot of discussion, but it 
was worth it).

Did I complain on this mailing list?
No.
 Because I know that the devs are humans and that they are volunteers. 
Did that stop me from filing bugs?
Heck no!
 I just opened one yesterday and it was fixed in less than 12h... without fuss 
or discussions. 

Some people forget, that the devs are unpaid volunteers who are not perfect 
beings, but humans - and some people forget, that the world does not revolve 
around them.


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

> > I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> > at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).
> 
> because it is their job to filter out noise so 'real' devs can 
> concentrate on the 'real' bugs. They are the first line of defence. 

Oh, funny, devs have to be defended from users ?

This really reminds me on the behaviour of some great German Telco. 
They defend their techs (who often are really good folks) by stupid 
callcenter people who can do almost nothing. The new management has 
recognized that such extreamly bad service had cost about a million
of customers and so changes that. (yeah, I didn't belive it first,
but they're now really trying to do good service) ...

> And since bug wranglers are humans, they can't know everything 
> and sometimes they make a mistake.

Of course. And I don't blame them for doing some mistake.
The problem is that it happens virtually everytime. I don't know if
it only affects my bugs which are declared invalid per default.

It would be really okay, if the wrangler says: "please provide
more information" or "the patch makes trouble with [...]" etc. 
And if some makes an error, could simply say one word: sorry.
This would be an normal discussion, as civilized people used to do.

> Bug wranglers are the first filter, if the bug is not assigned 
> to a team. And sometimes, they filter things, that should not be 
> filtered out. Stay calm, explain the situation - 

Once, I did. But that did not work. I was titled stupid, my issues
were declared invalid and I was told to go away.

> But having a fit on this ml does not help anybody - 

For me, it helps. I just want to tell the public what's going on.
After that I feel better. If anything changes then is unimportant 
at this point ;-P

And of course I inform people of my fixes. If they're interested, 
they can pick 'em, otherwise simply ignore me. 

> it just looks bad. And it makes YOU look bad.

I dont care. It totally irrelevant to me, if I look good or bad 
in such an unimportant area like b.g.o.

All that matters is that I get my problems solved as quick and
easy as possible. And of course I like to give my works on OSS
back to the community. 


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2007, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
> > > I'm some bit confused that the wranglers should do such decisions
> > > at all (if they're not also involved in the affected package).
> >
> > because it is their job to filter out noise so 'real' devs can
> > concentrate on the 'real' bugs. They are the first line of defence.
>
> Oh, funny, devs have to be defended from users ?

from abusive users?
yes

also from mediocre bug reports, and bugs where the problem is PEBCAC.
Because their time is limited. So they need people who filter out the junk.

>
> This really reminds me on the behaviour of some great German Telco.
> They defend their techs (who often are really good folks) by stupid
> callcenter people who can do almost nothing. The new management has
> recognized that such extreamly bad service had cost about a million
> of customers and so changes that. (yeah, I didn't belive it first,
> but they're now really trying to do good service) ...

Telekom?

Telekom had always bad service, they have bad service, they will have bad 
service.

But you can't compare a multi-billion euro business with a VOLUNTEER project.

>
> > And since bug wranglers are humans, they can't know everything
> > and sometimes they make a mistake.
>
> Of course. And I don't blame them for doing some mistake.
> The problem is that it happens virtually everytime. I don't know if
> it only affects my bugs which are declared invalid per default.

and strangely it only happened once for me. Maybe it is the quality and tone 
of your bug reports?

>
> It would be really okay, if the wrangler says: "please provide
> more information" or "the patch makes trouble with [...]" etc.
> And if some makes an error, could simply say one word: sorry.
> This would be an normal discussion, as civilized people used to do.

and strangely, that is the usual way. 

Except with Jakub - but that is a completly different problem.

>
> > Bug wranglers are the first filter, if the bug is not assigned
> > to a team. And sometimes, they filter things, that should not be
> > filtered out. Stay calm, explain the situation -
>
> Once, I did. But that did not work. I was titled stupid, my issues
> were declared invalid and I was told to go away.

and you did?

I stayed and after the third or fourth comment someone with the knowledge came 
in and ended it.

If your bug is valid, stay there. Explain your problem. Maybe cc the correct 
teams/devs.

As I said, the bug wranglers are just human (and one of them is pretty... 
harsh).

>
> > But having a fit on this ml does not help anybody -
>
> For me, it helps. I just want to tell the public what's going on.
> After that I feel better. If anything changes then is unimportant
> at this point ;-P

but nothing changes because the people responsible for your anger do not read 
this.

>
> And of course I inform people of my fixes. If they're interested,
> they can pick 'em, otherwise simply ignore me.

and what about the people not subscribed to the ml?

>
> > it just looks bad. And it makes YOU look bad.
>
> I dont care. It totally irrelevant to me, if I look good or bad
> in such an unimportant area like b.g.o.

for an unimportant area you make a lot of fuss about it.

>
> All that matters is that I get my problems solved as quick and
> easy as possible. And of course I like to give my works on OSS
> back to the community.
>

but complaining on the ml, instead to the devs, userrel oder devrel, won't 
solve your problem. If you feel abused, talk to userrel/devrel. It is their 
JOB to resolve the situation. And the last time a certain bugwrangler was too 
abusive, he got hit with the cluehammer 40 000.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 17:07:42 +0200
Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:

> just as I thought, certain folks had their lessons now it's 
> maybe worth contributing someting, it starts again: 
> Critical bugs are simply declared invalid. 
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=180935
> 
> Again the old philosophy "what I don't understand is invalid".
> 
> Obviously my contributions are unwelcomed, so I closed the bug.
> 
> BTW, I've already fixed it. If anyone's *seriously* interested,
> give a note. Evrything else is a waste of my time.

Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already knows
you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and waiting long
enough for the bug wranglers to catch up, answering nicely to their
statements and that you're always correct. Your solution to that bug
was charming and short: Dump what you didn't see making sense (is that
what you said about things being "invalid"?) -- instead of complicated
solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) and keeping at least the
functionality in there.

-hwh

PS: free sarcasm for everyone, just pick your favorite above. And sorry
for adding to the inevitable noise.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

short correction/addition:

On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 17:48:17 +0200
Hans-Werner Hilse <hilse@web.de> wrote:

> [...] complicated solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) [...]

or just throwing in find's "-L" switch.


-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Hans-Werner Hilse <hilse@web.de> wrote:

> Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already 
> knows you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and

I'm really tired of your boring personal attacks. 
Can't you come up with some more interesting ? Maybe a polar 
weather report or an fallen over rice bag ? ...
 
> Your solution to that bug was charming and short: Dump what you 
> didn't see making sense 

In fact: yes. It doesn't make sense to me that startup is refused
if the files do not seem to be owned by the current user. Eons 
ago it had been okay, but today (with ACLs) this is really no 
reliable source on permissions.

> (is that what you said about things being "invalid" ?) 

NO. The bug, so the whole issue (not my patch), was declared invalid.
This means nothing else that "there is no problem".

> -- instead of complicated solutions like e.g. using readlink(1) 
> and keeping at least the functionality in there.

At the point where my bug was declared invalid, there was no more
motivation for me to think about that. 

Why wasn't you solution just said in the bug, as response of mine ?
Then I just would have tried it and we had seen if worked. 

But obviously there's not cooperation wanted w/ me.
Neither my fault nor my problem.



cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 00:03:52 +0200 Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de>
wrote:

> > Well, since your awesome efforts last time, everyone here already 
> > knows you're the most polite bug reporter, absolutely fair and
> 
> I'm really tired of your boring personal attacks. 

In fact, it was the first one. I never replied to any of your harsh,
unfriendly postings before. I really regret I did this time (not
because I didn't mean it the way I've put it). And BTW: I *did* reply to
nice and civilized postings of yours in the past.

> > Your solution to that bug was charming and short: Dump what you 
> > didn't see making sense 
> 
> In fact: yes. It doesn't make sense to me that startup is refused
> if the files do not seem to be owned by the current user. Eons 
> ago it had been okay, but today (with ACLs) this is really no 
> reliable source on permissions.

This certainly is a matter for discussion. And to go further, even the
references to earlier bugs in that section don't seem to have to do
with the problem. I think you're absolutely right in that there
shouldn't be a check at all, because it would be not really gentoo-like
to react over-jealous to users who want to shoot themselves in their
knees. So, yes, my feeling is the same: It's a stupid check.

However: That wasn't the point you made in your posting and neither in
the bug report. You stated instead that it breaks on symlinks and that
this specifically is the problem. Your "fix" was too general for what
it stated to fix. It removed the functionality that it claimed to fix.
Without explanation and reasoning, I'm really happy that such bugs are
not blindly accepted, i.e. at least regarding the fix.

> > (is that what you said about things being "invalid" ?) 
> 
> NO. The bug, so the whole issue (not my patch), was declared invalid.
> This means nothing else that "there is no problem".

And you really read the according notice, right? That you should reopen
it if it isn't fixed for you, yes? Well, I've definately seen some more
harsh bug closures.

> Why wasn't you solution just said in the bug, as response of mine ?
> Then I just would have tried it and we had seen if worked. 

I better leave the reasoning w/ Jakub to you. I think that's a nice
exercise in working out some personal problems with him expressed in
your answers to that bug report. I really didn't feel like putting my
ideas below *that* kind of text. In fact, I would be more likely opening
a new bug, if it ever bites me.


-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[felix]

I see complaints about the bug reporting style, but no mea culpas.  I
had an experience with gentoo bugs recently which confirms his
experience on a smaller level.  The apache ebuilds used to recognize
USERDIR to override the default "public_html" value.  The 2.4 ebuilds
discarded that for no reason.  I filed a bug which was promptly closed
for no good reason, only the bogus answer that the new configuraion
files layout took care of it.  I reopened it with a more detailed
description of the problem and included the URL of the apache
documentation which explains that the suexec binary has to be compiled
with the USERDIR values known at compile time.  A week later, the bug
was properly closed with a better solution than the old 2.2 solution,
and a more permanent solution than my home grown work around.

Some may remember me from whining a month or two ago about the
atrocious color philosophy with emerge.  The reaction both times from
the gentoo community was merely a repeat of what I have come to expect
from several years of my own and from friends' and colleagues'
experiences: blame the messenger.  Lash out at the poster, don't
bother to even investigate the problem.  When in doubt, scream and
shout, run in circles, pull a pout.

I seldom complain any more.  It's not worth the hassle and feedback,
and it accomplishes nothing.  The gentoo developers have enough bad
eggs to tasint everybody.  There are plenty of good eggs, but they
need to speak up and stop the bad eggs from ruining their reputation.
I liken it to cops: as long as the good ones won't turn in the bad
ones for framing people, taking bribes, and general corrupt practices,
the good cops are going to be tarred with the same brush as the bad
ones.

-- 
            ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
     Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / felix@crowfix.com
  GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E  6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

felix@crowfix.com ha scritto:
> I filed a bug which was promptly closed
> for no good reason, only the bogus answer that the new configuraion
> files layout took care of it.  I reopened it with a more detailed
> description of the problem and included the URL of the apache
> documentation which explains that the suexec binary has to be compiled
> with the USERDIR values known at compile time.  A week later, the bug
> was properly closed with a better solution than the old 2.2 solution,
> and a more permanent solution than my home grown work around.

So complaining, in the end, actually worked, isn't it?  You had your bug
solved in one week. Doesn't look bad at all to me.

> Some may remember me from whining a month or two ago about the
> atrocious color philosophy with emerge.  The reaction both times from
> the gentoo community was merely a repeat of what I have come to expect
> from several years of my own and from friends' and colleagues'
> experiences: blame the messenger.  Lash out at the poster, don't
> bother to even investigate the problem.  When in doubt, scream and
> shout, run in circles, pull a pout.

No. I remember that thread and as far as I remember you were simply told
that there were a lot of things you could do to solve the issue, but
that whining of the users mailing list wasn't one of that. And when told
to contact emerge developers you just told that their coding style
showed they're too dumb people to dishonor yourself going down the
stairs from the heavens to earth and talk to them. How it's different
that from "When in doubt, scream and shout, run in circles, pull a pout." ?

Note that the "atrocious color philosophy" wasn't even actually a bug:
was just an annoying usability problem. Given that you were one of the
very few to complain about it (not that you didn't have the right to
complain, of course: I remember what the problem was and I'm quite
sympathetic to you about it: but still, you were one of the few thinking
it was actually really important) while other gentoo users happily use
emerge and like (or at least do not find "atrocious") its colors, maybe
the developers have a point in shifting the color problem down in the
priority list. This is a clear case of "The world does not revolve
around you" awareness.

> I seldom complain any more.  It's not worth the hassle and feedback,
> and it accomplishes nothing.  

You just posted an example where you told us that it accomplished a lot
in solving the apache bug.

> The gentoo developers have enough bad
> eggs to tasint everybody.  There are plenty of good eggs, but they
> need to speak up and stop the bad eggs from ruining their reputation.
> I liken it to cops: as long as the good ones won't turn in the bad
> ones for framing people, taking bribes, and general corrupt practices,
> the good cops are going to be tarred with the same brush as the bad
> ones.

Oh, please. Gentoo developers are just human beings. Developers are not
renowned for their friendliness, and (like everyone else) sometimes they
can be rude, nasty, unhelpful or plain stupid. I know that, I understand
that. But how can one of the "bad" ones taint the other ones, is beyond
my comprehension. Do you think Gentoo developers are a gang of teddy boys?

You (and the OP) IMHO suffer of having not enough patience. Patience is
a hard virtue to build, and it's painful to deal with. Still, you have
to use it to gain something. You can't just do one, two attempts and
then throw the towel. If the developer does not understand, try to
understand why he does not. Probably your situation resembles a common
problem that he's used to see people complain but that it is not a bug
(like yours could be instead): explain carefully it. Try to get someone
else to reproduce the bug and let him/her add up to your bug report.
Show some will to collaborate in solving the problem. Have respect for
their work, always: they owe you nothing, they're doing it for *free*,
for you. When I did it, the few times I had to report a bug, I had my
problems solved in hours or days at most.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[felix]

Complaining TWICE worked.  The problem I complained about shouldn't
have happened in the first place; someonex fixed something that wasn't
broken and made it broken.

Your response is absolutely typical of my problem with the gentoo dev
community.  You misstate a complaint, overreact to it, and apparently
feel pretty smug about your accomplishment.  No one will admit to the
two screwups (first breaking a working ebuild, second incorrectly
closing a bug on it).  Instead you lash out at those who point out
problems.

Yes, I had the wrong program when I compalined about the color
problem.  But the gentoo community response then as now was to lash
out, scream and shout, not to actually investigate.  And when I
finally left the thread alone, you geniuses were still ranting about
it three days later when I next checked.

You folks may think you have a cool system, and it is in some ways and
could be in many others.  But I know many people who tried gentoo and
bailed precisely because of the shoot the messenger mentality so
pervasive here; the self-selected sample you see is meaningless.

Go ahead, have another three days' fun.  Maybe I'll spark some more
tinders in a month or two.  I wouldn't want to deprive you of your
fun.

-- 
            ... _._. ._ ._. . _._. ._. ___ .__ ._. . .__. ._ .. ._.
     Felix Finch: scarecrow repairman & rocket surgeon / felix@crowfix.com
  GPG = E987 4493 C860 246C 3B1E  6477 7838 76E9 182E 8151 ITAR license #4933
I've found a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem but I see I've run out of room o
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

felix@crowfix.com ha scritto:
> Complaining TWICE worked.  

Is it so bad? I'd say complaining ten times would be bad, but twice
seems a reasonable number of attempts.

> The problem I complained about shouldn't
> have happened in the first place; someonex fixed something that wasn't
> broken and made it broken.

Bugs! What an awkward occurrence in the world of programming! And, even
more unusual, people who should improve programs... introduce new bugs
too! Alas! They even have a word for these "incredibly rare" kind of
bugs: regressions. They are as common as shit, my friend. I just
discovered two of them, today, in the data analysis software I code in
my lab :)

Probably someone fixed something that WAS broken but, doing that, also
unfixed something else. In programming, often, tightening a string
somewhere looses it somewhere else. Bug fixing is harder than
programming itself.

> Your response is absolutely typical of my problem with the gentoo dev
> community.  You misstate a complaint, overreact to it, and apparently
> feel pretty smug about your accomplishment. 

Where did I misstate (?) a complaint?
Where did I overreact?
And where did I feel smug about it?

You had perfectly legit complaints. I (we) just told you what the
correct procedure to get solved is. Note:maybe it won't get them solved,
I agree. But ranting is not a way either. All you can logically do is
try again to follow the procedure, or fix them yourself. There's nothing
else you can do. Really.

> No one will admit to the
> two screwups (first breaking a working ebuild, second incorrectly
> closing a bug on it).  Instead you lash out at those who point out
> problems.

I fully, completely admit the screwups!
What you fail to understand is that they're common everyday problems
that will always occur on a large project like an operating system
distribution, and that there are methods to fix them most of the time.

> Yes, I had the wrong program when I compalined about the color
> problem.  But the gentoo community response then as now was to lash
> out, scream and shout, not to actually investigate.

What there was to "investigate"?
First, we are NOT the community that must "investigate", since we're
users, not devels. Ask devels to "investigate".
Second, your problem was not something like, say, "X freezing, no error
messages, where could I look?", but more like "colours ugly as hell, wtf
why don't they change them". What is there to investigate about that?
Everyone not colour-blind on this list knows what colours has emerge:
investigation finished.
Third, you actually already did all the investigation possible. You, IIRC:
-looked at emerge code
-didn't like that (probably rightly so)
-told yourself they're too dumb to even understand a complain (not
rightly so, IMHO)
-rant on gentoo-users

Really, what should have we done? It is not a rhetoric question: I just
don't understand. If you can tell me an example of what should we have
done, I'm really and sincerely happy to hear it.

>  And when I
> finally left the thread alone, you geniuses were still ranting about
> it three days later when I next checked.

That's a good point. We can't resist flamebaits, that's all. :) But so,
what has it to do with the problem?

> You folks may think you have a cool system, and it is in some ways and
> could be in many others.  But I know many people who tried gentoo and
> bailed precisely because of the shoot the messenger mentality so
> pervasive here; the self-selected sample you see is meaningless.

Well, I tell you a secret: even with all its quirks and defects, Gentoo
has one of the more friendly and helpful communities in the OSS world.
Try have a look at the Debian, OpenBSD or Slackware forums/ml/IRC
channels, and you'll understand.

> Go ahead, have another three days' fun.  Maybe I'll spark some more
> tinders in a month or two.  I wouldn't want to deprive you of your
> fun.

I can't understand your sarcasm. It's you that put flamebaits in the
forests -how can you blame us for the fire? :)

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, I tell you a secret: even with all its quirks and defects, Gentoo
> has one of the more friendly and helpful communities in the OSS world.
> Try have a look at the Debian, OpenBSD or Slackware forums/ml/IRC
> channels, and you'll understand.

I concur, not only does gentoo have one of the nicer communities, it
also has more informed people. ( probably releated to it being a
generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )

Many a time you'll find in non gentoo help rooms that everyones just
as lost as you are when you have a /real/ problem, and when you have a
/real/ problem you'll end up fixing it yourself after helping 50 other
people fix theirs.

Many a time Has it been I've googled for an answer to a problem and
the answer has been found amongst gentoos troves of data, in either
wiki, or forum, despite the fact that the problem i encoutered may
have occured on a non-gentoo box, and i did not enter 'gentoo'
anywhere in the search string.


-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[b.n.]

Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> ( probably releated to it being a
> generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )

OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and it's
 the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've ever
seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and because I
have different needs, but the Linux community has only to learn from the
Ubuntus.

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Samstag, 9. Juni 2007, b.n. wrote:
> Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> > On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ( probably releated to it being a
> > generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> > unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )
>
> OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
> slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and it's
>  the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've ever
> seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and because I
> have different needs, but the Linux community has only to learn from the
> Ubuntus.
>

what to learn? How to make kcontrol worse? The slowest boot of all times? A 
braindead installer? A patched-to-death kpdf?

Yes, there is something to learn from the ubuntus. Like: don't make their 
mistakes. Or: there is a difference between userfriendly and made for idiots.

Been there - I will never touch *buntu again. If I ever feel the need to use 
something else than gentoo it will be Slackware. Lean, mean, fast slackware.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/9/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kent Fredric ha scritto:
> > On 6/8/07, b.n. <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> > ( probably releated to it being a
> > generally harder distro to use that *cough* ewwbuntu *cough*
> > unlinspired *cough*  or *cough* deadrat *cough* )
>
> OT: Ubuntu distros (Kubuntu, expecially) are really, really shiny and
> slick pieces of software. I just installed Kubuntu 7.04 at work and it's
>  the more polished, ready-to-go, easy to use Linux distro I've ever
> seen. I use Gentoo on my home desktop for various reasons and because I
> have different needs, but the Linux community has only to learn from the
> Ubuntus.

OT: My detest for the aformentioned brands are experience driven
except for the linspire. Genoo > Everything.

I can say this because I started on debian pretty much, and being a
control freak, I like everything the way I like it, not the way
somebody else says I should like it. Gentoo is more free ( in the 'do
what you want' )  sense than any other distro I know of.  Periodic
releases which force users to re-install  effectively to upgrade =
bollux.  I know with ewbuntu family you dont really /have/ to, but
most do anyway, and theres always this _hype_ with every 'release'
that comes out which i just don't get. My software is newer, and the
only 'release' I ever see is a new profile.

I jumped ship because I was in debian, and compiling a lot of things
by hand because they wern't available in unstable/experimental yet,
and the software was _STILL_ stale, and figgured going to a
source-based distro was the logical step.

Ease of use & userfriendlyness are /not/ things i look for in an OS.
Unless they're tools and things ill actually use,  I care not. Beryl ,
Compiz & XGL i'll never be caught dead using, ive experimented with
them just to see what the fuss is about , and then i turn them off and
stay that way.



-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Iain Buchanan]

On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:13 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:

>  Genoo > Everything.

given Everything = Gentoo + Debian + RedHat + ...,
let EverythingElse = Everything - Gentoo;

then
 Gentoo > Everything
  =~ Gentoo > Gentoo + EverythingElse
  =~ Gentoo - Gentoo > Gentoo + EveryThingElse - Gentoo
  =~ 0 > EverythingElse
  =~ EverythingElse < 0

I agree!
-- 
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

"The biggest problem facing software engineering is the one it will 
 never solve - politics." 
 -- Gavin Baker, ca 1996, An unusually cynical moment inspired by working on a large
    project beseiged by politics

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Again: Critical bugs considered invalid

[Kent Fredric]

On 6/11/07, Iain Buchanan <iaindb@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-06-09 at 21:13 +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
>
> >  Genoo > Everything.
>
> given Everything = Gentoo + Debian + RedHat + ...,
> let EverythingElse = Everything - Gentoo;
>
> then
>  Gentoo > Everything
>   =~ Gentoo > Gentoo + EverythingElse
>   =~ Gentoo - Gentoo > Gentoo + EveryThingElse - Gentoo
>   =~ 0 > EverythingElse
>   =~ EverythingElse < 0
>
> I agree!

If that concept is a first, I suggest it go into fortune-mod-gentoo-forums.

That is certainly quote worthy imo :D
-- 
Kent
ruby -e '[1, 2, 4, 7, 0, 9, 5, 8, 3, 10, 11, 6, 12, 13].each{|x|
print "enNOSPicAMreil kdrtf@gma.com"[(2*x)..(2*x+1)]}'
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list