On 26/10/2018 18:23, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote: > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 17:29:31 +0100 > Konstantin Gizdov <a...@kge.pw> wrote: > >> On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote: >>> I must point out this very recent mailing list thread: >>> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html >>> >>> In this thread, you: >>> >>> 1) whine about someone taking over *your* packages, because you're the one >>> that >>> knows them and has cared for them and, after all, they're YOURS. >> I did no such thing. I opened the thread by thanking Felix for picking >> them up and asked a few questions about the plans for the packages and >> how to pass on what I know, because I was having trouble doing that over >> the bug tracker. What ensued after (the responses) was not my doing. I >> tried to respond to every and all comments respectfully and I think you >> will find a through discussion was had and a lot of details were sorted. >> >> Part of that was revealing that the ROOT stack was being picked up - >> yes, I care about it as it directly affects my profession and I've given >> thorough reasons why. I **never claimed the packages were mine** - if >> you talk about the usage of the word 'my', it clearly refers to me being >> the maintainer. I said I've put work into them, continue to do so and >> wanted to make sure I can pass that on in full. My TU application is me >> trying to do that. > You did thank Felix, but then went on to make your true intent extremely > clear. > You specifically ask why your packages were moved (there doesn't have to be a > reason), and say things like: > > "The reason I'm asking is because over the years I've added and been > maintaining some professional software and these packages are part of that > chain. Colleagues in the field have become accustomed to me for packaging > with care and updating with new features." > > The aforementioned thanks would appear to be perfunctory, like saying "No > offense, but you're an idiot". Nope, it's like - I wanna make sure the stuff works and want to ask some questions. > > Reference: > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html > >>> 2) whine about how things were handled on the bug tracker, thinking that >>> this >>> whining is how things get done. It's not. >> Again, I did no such thing. I explained what happened and asked how can >> I do better. I was told I have to stick to the bug tracker. Thus, I said >> why I think this approach is failing in that particular case and gave >> exampes. >> >> By the way, it was only because of that email that one of the bugs was >> reopened (by Eli) and fixed, otherwise it was ignored. Seems to me my >> email worked fine. > And this attitude right here is a major problem. One ticket was closed because > it was very clearly not a bug. The second one that was closed was closed based > on the information you gave, the reopen request contained different > information. Based on that, I didn't deny the reopen request and decided to > wait until I got home to try it. In the mean time, Eli took a look at the > request and reopened it. How do I know this? Also, I just sent an email with questions, you could have replied - 'looking into it'. For example,
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034281.html > In the middle of all of that, and completely independently and unrelated, you > sent your email to this list, but you still seem to be under the impression > that it was a good thing and actually accomplished something. I can assure > you, > it accomplished nothing good. OK. Good to know. >>> 3) Tell bald faced lies about how things transpired on the bug tracker. >> I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. In the many emails I wrote that >> evening, I got confused about one bug being closed, where it wasn't. You >> tried to call me out for lying and my whole point being wrong, but later >> **you yourself sent a follow up email to correct your own statement**. I >> acknowledged my mistake on the spot. Surely, we can agree all of us make >> mistakes. **In no way or form was I telling bald faced lies.** > So you opened 3 tickets. Two were closed and *one* (1) was denied a reopen. > Yet > you claim "I tried to re-open all 3 bugs but was denied with little to no > comment/explanation." There is too much disparity here to be a typo or a > mistake. > > Reference: > https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034286.html The mistake was I tried to re-open all 3 instead of 2, which I acknowledged on the spot. I just check in the bug tracker. This is the last email about this to you too.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature