FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian dpkg

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-04-2012, 02:20 PM
"John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell"
 
Default Multiarch support in dpkg — really in time for wheezy?

I discount Hertzog completely. He has no patch that creates a release - but words against words.

Prove it works for installing users with a widely accepted and applauded release. You cannot yet.

Then you can say those point out minor failures are "fear mongering".

Raphael Hertzog wrote:

Hi,

On Sat, 03 Mar 2012, Guillem Jover wrote:

I've already said elsewhere why I didn't reply to the RT mail, and while
obviously I'm not them, I'd venture to say their (IMO unjustified) angry
reaction has been (partially) due to your campaign of fear mongering...


There has been no such campaign. The only thing I did was to respond to
queries and give out the few information I had on the progress
of your "review".

Obviously I was not happy with the time it was taking, and I didn't
hide this. But you, as a person, were never a target and you shouldn't
act like a victim.

I'm sorry that you felt that way, it was certainly not my intention
to ruin your motivation. The situation has been quite uneasy for me as
well, and despite what you might believe, I have not asked people to rally
against you.

I only tried to find a solution to get multiarch into Debian since
you have been taking so long and since you were voluntarily not letting me
help you. That's why I queried the tech-ctte earlier and that's also
why I asked the leader if he would be ready to mediate between us
in order to get clear rules on who can commit what.


discuss this matter again any further, more so when your stance seems
to me to change between public and private communications.


I'm not sure what you're referring to. Feel free to elaborate if you think
it can help. I don't have much to hide, I believe I have been honest in
what I said.


1/ Nobody rushed anything. The code has been available since march last
year.

Obviously not for lack of trying. That paragraph was replying to what the
“leader” thinks should have happened. If it had been for you, the code
would had been merged long time ago, as it was, with all its problems...


Yes, if I were alone, it would have been merged much earlier. But at this
point in time, we'd have had 2 or 3 intermediary dpkg releases and the most
important issues would have been fixed. And the remaining design
differences would have not changed much IMO. We can just agree to disagree
on this.

But you should also note that I did not forcefully merge it, and this
despite several persons encouraging me to go ahead. Instead I did try
to work with you... but apparently trying to help you just ended up
increasing your blood pressure level. :-(


2/ I have offered multiple times to fixup any problem that your code
review would have unveiled. So it's not true to claim that all the
responsibilities land on you. The real problem is that you have taken
multiarch under your umbrella as your own pet project, completely
ignoring me and my offers of help.

So one gets pressured, pestered, annoyed and as a consequence drained of
all fun and motivation, while somehow managing to keep going with a civil
tone, and is expected to still have to deal closely with the offender...


At least you recognise that you avoided interactions with me. Thank you.


It's also interesteing how the reality about the “real problem” changed
with time...


Indeed "the real problem" is probably inappropriate since we have multiple
problems...

[ snip the ad-hominem attack ]


But we had nothing like this... don't be surprised then if everybody
is watching you. You have created yourself the conditions that lead
to this pression on your shoulders. Working in the open and giving
clear directives so that other can step in relieves that pression.

Oh, because that pressure, present already more than one year ago, did
not start instead from say, contractual obligations...


That pressure was (supposed to be) on my shoulders. Yes I deliberately
kept you in the loop (and asked you to review the code as I produced it)
because (1) you expressed earlier some fears that I "stealed" you
multiarch (2) it was the right thing to do since you are the team leader
and your comments are always very valuable.

I have certainly responsibilities in how the situation evolved, but I
have always been willing to make efforts to improve the situation because
I believe that Debian is best served by having both of us maintaining dpkg
instead of only one of us. With your latest (very harsh) comments, I fear
that you got to the point where only one of us can stay... I hope that was
not the intent.

On my side, I am not rancorous and I have no problem continuing to work
with you if you can cope with me.

Cheers,



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F53883C.4050308@cox.net">http://lists.debian.org/4F53883C.4050308@cox.net
 
Old 03-04-2012, 03:28 PM
Guillem Jover
 
Default Multiarch support in dpkg — really in time for wheezy?

On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 23:25:09 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 15:14:16 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > You have claimed numerous times that the branch was "unsound, buggy"
> > (implying that I'm crappy coder, etc.) and I would not take offense on
> > this if you were at the same time pointing out concreate real problems and
> > if we could have a sane discussion on how to fix them.
>
> I guess we have either not been looking at the same mailing list or
> code base then, it's been a *fact*.

I think that due to poor wording or improper quoting, this might have
been misinterpreted. I've only been referring exclusively to the claims
of technical unsuitability of the code, nothing else and nothing more.

guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120304162809.GA21805@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120304162809.GA21805@gaara.hadrons.org
 
Old 03-04-2012, 06:56 PM
Russ Allbery
 
Default Multiarch support in dpkg — really in time for wheezy?

"John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell" <johnandsara2@cox.net> writes:

> I discount Hertzog completely. He has no patch that creates a release -
> but words against words.

> Prove it works for installing users with a widely accepted and applauded
> release. You cannot yet.

> Then you can say those point out minor failures are "fear mongering".

John (or Sara?), your contributions to this thread are at the moment just
making things worse. You have been talking about other topics entirely
than the ones we've been discussing, and now you're attacking people based
on a *very* incomplete understanding of the overall situation.

The contention here is difficult enough to discuss without uninvolved
third parties making very aggressive comments based on partial
information. This thread is the surface of a large number of different
conversations between a bunch of different people, only some of which have
been on the mailing list.

Please, could you take your specific technical concerns to a separate
discussion and not jump into the middle of a difficult personal issue
between people you're not working closely with?

--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87d38skumw.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu">http://lists.debian.org/87d38skumw.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu
 
Old 04-14-2012, 07:27 AM
Guillem Jover
 
Default Multiarch support in dpkg — really in time for wheezy?

On Sun, 2012-03-04 at 15:43:56 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> [...], but I
> have always been willing to make efforts to improve the situation because
> I believe that Debian is best served by having both of us maintaining dpkg
> instead of only one of us. With your latest (very harsh) comments, I fear
> that you got to the point where only one of us can stay... I hope that was
> not the intent.

Well, my willingness towards wanting to work with you has been
decreasing significantly during the past last year, culminating with
this last episode. Let's say that right now I'm less than thrilled on
the propospect of having to do so...

guillem


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-dpkg-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120414072727.GA20249@gaara.hadrons.org">http://lists.debian.org/20120414072727.GA20249@gaara.hadrons.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:09 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org