Hello everybody
I would like to raise an issue about Oswald Buddenhagen abusing his maintainer
rights. He is constantly blocking the merge of the patchset which implements a
new feature in Qbs [0]. I started working on this almost a year ago and the
issue was approved for the first time in October 2020 (!). Since then, Oswald
popped up more and more random topics, demanding answers to all possible
questions about the overall architecture and blocking the merge. While I highly
appreciate his input, I don’t think it’s productive to postpone a relatively
small feature for almost a year based on the assumption that it may not fit in
the overall architecture. I prefer to move forward in small step, collect
use-cases from actual users’ needs and see how this feature shows itself.
Also, Oswald mainly reviews the documentation and makes assumptions about the
code based onion the documentation… I find this approach flawed, since
documentation does not (and should not) show the user all the complexity of the
actual implementation. Another annoying part is that Oswald neither does not
know the Qbs code nor has desire to read and understand parts he’s commenting
on.
I’ve been tolerating such behaviour for almost a year, but now I am confident
that we can and should proceed with the current implementation and that Oswald
is stalling the Qbs development. We’re not moving forward, I cannot fix bugs
that depend on this feature I cannot implement new features based on this one -
see the list of issue blocked by the related JIRA task - [1].
Oswald has been doing this in the past [2] - instead of allowing to contribute
a small fix for a simple bug, Oswald turned the patchset into a lengthy
discussion about architecture… I haven’t seen any contributions from Christian
Gagneraud ever since (might be unrelated, though) and the bug is not fixed as
of today.
I kindly asked Oswald to remove his -2 and allow me to proceed, but he chose to
ignore my request. I’d like to ask Gerrit Administrators to remove his -2 so I
can proceed with the development.
Also, some actions might be taken to prevent from happening in the future - if
technically possible, I’d like to request the revoke of his approver rights on
the Qbs project as per this part of the Qt Governance Model:
«In extreme circumstances Approver privileges can be revoked by a vote of no
confidence, proposed by an existing Approver or Maintainer and arranged by the
Chief Maintainer. Privilege revocation requires a two-thirds majority vote of
those Approvers and Maintainers who express an opinion.» [3]
Ivan.
[0] https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qbs/qbs/+/315910
<https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qbs/qbs/+/315910>
[1] https://bugreports.qt.io/projects/QBS/issues/QBS-1604
[2] https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qbs/qbs/+/301461
<https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qbs/qbs/+/301461>
[3] https://wiki.qt.io/The_Qt_Governance_Model
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
