[Mageia-dev] [135989]

Wed Aug 31 23:27:26 CEST 2011

2011/8/30 John Balcaen <mikala at mageia.org>:
+> 2011/8/29 Zé <mmodem00 at gmail.com>:
+>
+>>> [...]
+>>
+>> Yes the commit coment was incorrect, what i wanted to say was this:
+>> - set requires in devel package to version like hapens for restant packages
+>>
+>> Since all soprano packages have requires to version (except the devel
+>> package), i just put the devel requires also to version, that way we
+>> had soprano requires only to version.
+>> See if we were really acting as a team then i would replade restant
+>> soprano packages to have requires to release instead changing then to
+>> version, but you with dmorgan have put me simply apart, so how could
+>> you expect me to do things other way if you with dmorgan have simply
+>> alienated me.
+>
+> Because it's to difficult to ask before doing changes ?
+
+>From the last things you with dmorgan said and did this was also to
+see to what point you would go.
+
+The changes i made in kdelibs, that binaries in kde are only for
+development so i moved them to devel package and were reverted.
+Like dmorgan said all coomits i do even if were good commits would be
+reverted if not reviewed by you, that was some he just invented and
+that i never agreed.
+And as we agreed, only important changes should be discussed like it
+happened with the improvemenet i was planing to do to Qt.
+
+>> You were also who started doing all by own way, you didnt discuss with
+>> me anychanges, for example the changes you made in wiki.
+>> For example you add severall items to Golds section without discussing
+>> any, they should be first added as proposals so that could be first
+>> discussed in a meeing.
+>
+> Because thoses changes/proposal where *already* decided *before* you even
+> come to KDE, i simply wrote them down.
+> Of course that does not mean that we won't change the goal after, it is not like
+> it was written in the stone... it's a *wiki*...
+
+Thats not quite true, since for example i suggested that the lib
+packages could start being named only with a underscore instead
+dashes, and you acted like that was already decided, seams you were
+the only one who decided.
+
+>> But for you theres no kde team, since you just do what it pleases you.
+>> But now you should be even more pleased since now dmorgan in the kde
+>> packaging policy wiki page have put that now in a PENDING status.
+>> I know very well from where comes all that dmorgan animosityagainst
+>> me, mem and dmorgan is the past have already had divergencies, so let
+>> you know that this simply dodnt appear out of the blue, there are a
+>> history regarding dmorgan and me.
+>
+> I don't care at all about animosity between you and dmorgan, stricly no...
+>
+>> Before dmorgan appear we were going ok, of course we had some
+>> discussions but thats normal, but its not normal that without any
+>> proper reason dmorgan did talked to me with some "tone" and
+>> "aggressiveness".
+>
+> You should double check how you're talking on irc before saying that.
+>
+>> You even said that i would be happy if you left Mageia, and like i
+>> answered in other thread you were too far from the truth, you are a
+>> person that are always contributing, that put much effort to help
+>> Mageia, and no one in his perfect mind would think was good to put
+>> away some person with those capabilities.
+>>
+>> Some of my latest commits were correct and simple (for eexamplein
+>> kdelibs4), and they were reverted by dmorgan based in a rule that he
+>> created, and that rule was simply put by him, without any discusion,
+>> no one were asked about and i never agreed with it, he simply said
+>> "and now i take my sysadmin hat..." and did it.
+>>
+>> So from that point what would be the purpose to discuss any with you
+>> since no one can diverge from you, when that happens dmorgan appears
+>> and "takes his sysadmin hat..." and rises his tone saying i cant do
+>> this or that.
+>> Seamsn now you and dmorgan own kde.
+>
+> Ok so maybe you can stop a little bit your paranoïa...
+> I asked dmorgan to reverse your previous commit because you did not ask
+> anything neither show us a commit when you were supposed to do as i told
+> you before but i guess you forgot this one (i did not do it personally because
+> i'm was quite buzy but i guess i should have done it...)
+> Here with your previous change i take the time to comment & ask for explanation
+> because you again did not ask & decided what was better from *your*
+> point of view.
+
+This i have commented in the begining of this message.
+
+>> Your behaviour has changed mainly from the day that misc attacked me
+>> without knowing all facts, so from that point all that was being done
+>> as team SIMPLY didsappeared, and you didnt even said nothing about
+>> what dmorgan did, saying that my commits should be reviewed all by
+>> you, that is abusive, and if remember correctly untill that day we act
+>> as a team, and you be havior from that changed and severall times you
+>> rised your tone just like that for almost nothing.
+>
+> I'm sorry but my behaviour did not change at all... It's just because
+> i had enough with
+> your style aka « i'm going to propose something and if you're not
+> agree i'll apply it anyway
+> because i'm the older packager, i know how to do things etc etc ...»
+> or « i'm going to commit
+> some changes which is not important from my point of view so it's not
+> for other » or « i'm going
+> to commit something and *ask* after about this »
+>
+> You probably think that i was agree with you simply because i was
+> agree with *some* of
+> your suggestions that's all...
+>
+> I really don't remember also how we act as a team since you did not
+> take your part of the job:
+> i asked you to do a simple thing on the wiki ( add the members of the
+> kde team on a specific
+>  wiki page)  & suddendly you start changing without asking the
+> kde_policy_packaging wiki page
+
+I never acted like kde was mine, there were some commits i made in the
+begining but i remember we did had a conversation and i start
+discussing things, and as we agreeed discussing important things, as
+for the rest i think is preferable to just not comment...
+
+> I'm still waiting for your commit in soft regarding iaora_kde since June 12th...
+> You're not doing correctly your job & then you complain that we're not
+> acting as a team ?
+> Also maybe you can start helping on bug fixing on mageia like for
+> example Luc is doing ?
+>
+> I asked you to work on digikam2 initially but we spent too much time
+> talking about libs package because
+> you suddendly wanted to obsolete some kde libs because they were part
+> of digikam SC and i was forced to
+> ask neoclust & Gilles about this since you were not agree with me
+> about the lib packaging because you had
+> a better idea... and when we finally reached an agreement and you were
+> supposed to provide a spec quite soon
+> nothing happens..
+
+And now you say, as we discussed, so we did in fact discussed things
+and i didnt do any implementation without theres a consense.
+And as i already repleyed in other threads (but again you take things,
+you keep repeating yourself.), at that time i was too much busy with
+my son probems and didnt had time to do nothing, but i remember i did
+told you that.
+
+>
+>> I always wanted that we could all could get along with each other, of
+>> course we would have some discussions (thats normal, and its from
+>> discussions that development grows), and from that we would reach
+>> agreements and consensus about what to do or follow.
+>
+> What with discussion if you're simply does not care about my opinion ?
+> In fact you simply want to have a « leader » hat status ?
+
+And again seams your putting words in my mouth, like i liked you to leave...
+
+>> I think if we continued as a team without dmorgan interventions we
+>> would continue in the right path for Mageia grow and stability.
+>
+> I would better say that it would be better *without* you until you're
+> okay to discuss your changes
+> before commiting them or *even* better as i said in a previous private
+> email *TEST THEM* locally
+> by building them in a iurt chroot (& yes i already sent you the
+> documentation i used to create my
+> iurt repository locally) instead of commiting & fixing build errors by
+> submitting it in the BS.
+
+Yes, i tend to agree that at that time you didnt had others
+contributing or that could have a more active role and that always
+never disagree of your ideas, and all was like you wanted, wrongly or
+not. As i remember for example fixing severall things wrong in qt
+spec, many existing requires(pre) when there wasnt any %pre section.
+
+> So in summary please don't target anyone else when you're the culprit
+> with your attitude.
+> Again that does not mean that all your commits are wrong but sometimes
+> you changed the behavior
+> simply because you think it's better, for example recently you add a
+> patch on kdeutils (
+> http://svnweb.mageia.org/packages/cauldron/kdeutils4/current/SPECS/kdeutils4.spec?r1=128724&r2=134478
+> ) to remove  a simple rm -rf in a spec.
+> Is it wise to patch (& maintain a patch because i'm not sure you
+> submitted it upstream) when we can simply remove thoses files in the
+> spec ?
+
+Yes, thats the correct way to build kdeutils without printer_applet,
+not just removing files, but i think that patch will be submited
+upstream.
+
+> Did we dicuss about this ? no because you probably think it's a better
+> solution & it's a minor thing..
+
+That was already done after you started with that behaviour, but i
+also never see you discussing any change you made.
+Thats true, you never discuss any change, at least i never saw it.
+
+If theres a kde team, you and all kde members should discuss things,
+and maybe reach some agreement about whats really important to
+discuss, if dicuss all or just discuss more important changes, since
+discussing all can also delays development.
+
+>
+>> And again i appeal that we can that we could have a meeting so that
+>> all could be discussed and defined, so that now we should act as a
+>> whole without any frictions.
+>> Like i satated im not here to fight or bash no one, but to act as a
+>> part of a whole.
+>
+> I'm really doubt about that point since from what i see so far because
+> you're not
+> following your own words..
+>
+
+I think this doesnt deserve a real comment.
+
+
+-- 
+Zé
+