OK. Enough. Let's please end this. Filipe, if you want to discuss something technical with me then please email me privately. If you want to discuss something non-technical then don't bother.
Thanks again to everyone else who offered kind words. Sorry for the noise. On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 5:41 PM Marc Lavallée <[email protected]> wrote: > I wonder who's the harasser... I'm leaving the list, because it's not a > pleasant one. > > Marc > Le 21-01-03 à 20 h 34, Filipe Coelho a écrit : > > Harassment is not allowed. > > And what was going on was on the border of it. > > I can send you some quotes if really needed, but that would be off-list. > On 04/01/21 01:29, Marc Lavallée wrote: > > I just read the Debian Code of Conduct. There's nothing there that would > forbid Non-Session-Manager to be included in Debian (maybe I don't > understand it). Besides, the packager does not have the be the author or > maintainer of the software. > > Marc > Le 21-01-03 à 20 h 03, Filipe Coelho a écrit : > > Language used by Jonathan when talking to other developers in the github > issue tracker and additionally in private conversations. > > There was a whole issue that got deleted by Jonathan after an ugly rant > from him against everyone else in there. > That was the one of the worst ones I have ever seen in my life. Glad that > it is gone now. For the best. > > > On 04/01/21 00:56, Marc Lavallée wrote: > > Filipe, can you be more specific about a Code of Conduct issue (that > seemed to have excluded Non to be included in Debian)? What's "clear"? The > use of WAF? Did the elusive "leader" wrote something? > > Marc > Le 21-01-03 à 19 h 41, Filipe Coelho a écrit : > > Debian and Ubuntu were made aware of what was going on in the github > tickets. > > I do not want to name any names, but someone from a leader role read some > discussions and said it was a clear violation of their CoC and that it made > a real problem for packaging. > > Hope that clears it. > > > On 04/01/21 00:37, J. Liles wrote: > > Regarding Debian: I don't recall ever having dealt with a Debian packager. > I believe Non is already in the distros of every packager who ever > contacted me. Debian is not among them. So anyone who says that I somehow > personally pissed off the Debian packagers is either lying or talking about > some behind the scenes deal I wasn't party to. I don't know the first thing > about what it really takes to get packaged in Debian, so if someone wants > to offer some help and advice there, that would be great. I know a lot of > users would prefer to just apt-get install than to have to build something > from source. > > Grammoboy did contact the Debian packagers, I believe and asked me some > questions to relay the answers to them, but I never dealt with them > directly. This was around the time of the fork when Grammoboy was trying > very hard to advocate for NSM support everywhere (which I appreciate). > > I don't really know what the problem is with Debian, but since there's so > much misinformation going around, I have to assume it has something to do > with that. The last thing Grammoboy relayed to me was that my use of WAF > was the problem, but all of Drobilla's stuff is in Debian and it uses WAF > so that seems like a pretext to me. Maybe someone who's an expert in Debian > policy knows. > > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 4:05 PM Filipe Coelho <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 03/01/21 23:23, rosea.grammostola wrote: >> > One can think, encouraging that someone who forked the project, sents >> > a kind message to this list and I always want to be a proponent of >> > restored relations, but still your message feels a bit misplaced here >> > Filipe. There is no denying. >> >> I am sorry, that was not my intention. >> >> I had no plans to reply unless to correct false information or personal >> attacks. >> That was the case though. >> (I typically dislike mailing lists.) >> >> >> > The fact that NSM didn't hit Debian (still not in Debian afaik), had >> > nothing to do with the developer, it was because of NTK and waf. If >> > you guys wanted, it was possible to maintain a version of NSM without >> > NTK (Fltk only). I was helping Nils with it, at that moment, but >> > behind my and I guess our backs you guys where working on a fork. I >> > just became aware of it, when there arrived a message on the LAA >> > mailinglist, while having e-mail contact regularly the same week with >> > Nils. >> >> Why would we contact you in specific? >> >> You always been a protector of Jonathan in every level, even defending >> his verbal abuse, so we thought it would be useless to involve you. >> >> And it is not that correct that the only issue for Debian/Ubuntu is NTK. >> Jonhathan's past behaviour violates Debian and Ubuntu CoC, so there is a >> whole lot of friction from there too. >> >> >> > You guys didn't just forked, after telling that you would be forking >> > and discussing it. You did choose for a huge and hidden coup. >> > >> > Also the fact that you guys call it the community version, still gives >> > me a very bad taste. It's plain newspeak to present a well thought out >> > 'coup', behind the core community, as social. >> >> It is a community version by the real definition of the word, since now >> there is a community behind it rather than a single person. >> >> It was ugly, but as I said in the other thread-chain, it was a last >> resort. >> >> >> > That developer who didn't want to implement NSM was Hermann from >> > Guitarix. I discussed NSM support for Guitarix for more then 7(!) >> > years with him. His argumentation was that NSM should be in Debian >> > first. Fair enough, but to name that as a reason for a fork... >> >> That is the developer *you* know. >> >> Was that all of them? >> >> >> > With having Argodejo as alternative GUI and a nsmd version which could >> > be used in Debian, you guys had plenty space to hack around. But you >> > did choose to fork also the FLTK original GUI. >> >> The FLTK "legacy" GUI is my "fault". >> >> I tried Argodejo, but personally do not like it that much. I am not its >> target user, I feel. >> So I plead to the group to keep the old GUI, that I would do the work >> needed to make it run without NTK. >> There were a few side-effects from going from NTK to FLTK, most of which >> I submitted a patch for. >> >> It is actually a nice thing in my view, because now we can use NSM >> without depending on NTK, making compilation and packaging easier. >> Thus, hopefully getting more users to go into NSM. >> >> >> > I can't conclude otherwise that your plan was to totally replace >> > Non-Session-Manager with New-Session-Manager. Given the meaning of >> > Non-Session-Manager for Linuxaudio and the contribution by it's >> > developer, this still feels completely wrong. Especially the way you >> > did it. So your message feels misplaced, sorry. >> > >> > And indeed, this is huge downside of the LAU community lately. These >> > actions are cheered up by a small crowd who know each other well and >> > is backing up each other, even while they don't use NSM themselves. >> > Where the LAU community was a community of people with a scientific >> > background and/ or creative non-mainstream thinking, it's now a group >> > of witchhunters who call everyone with a different opinion a troll. >> >> LAU and LAD are dying off, but not related to the topic at hand, I think. >> >> We in these communities still hang out in IRC rooms and mailing lists. >> This is arcane tech by new generations, who are used to stuff like Slack >> and Discord. >> >> So the people that remain, I expect to be closer to one another, because >> we are now smaller than we used to be. >> Even during 2020 LAC live-stream, IRC was an afterthought >> >> >> > Hail the community! >> > >> > But sorry, as we use to say in this part of the world: weeds do not >> > die... Go male! :) >> > >> > Future? I don't see how these two projects can come together really. >> > What the people of the fork could do, is to sent patches as much as >> > possible to the original project maybe. And / or maybe get rid of the >> > FLTK fork and focus on Argodejo only. Anyway, that's not my >> > expertise, nor did I create this situation, nor do I want to waste my >> > time on it. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >>
