Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 12.03.2010, at 15:27, Andrey Hristov wrote:
Lukas,
Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
On 12.03.2010, at 14:52, Jani Taskinen wrote:
On 03/12/2010 03:43 PM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Because no decision has been made. Jani is creating facts without
basis. Furthermore normal development is continuing on the branches
we decided to have. Now there is suddenly a 5.4. The point in time
when we branch off a new trunk shouldn't be Jani deciding this
because he is pissed off because there are open OB bugs.
Where the hell did you imagine that one? I'm not pissed at or about anything.
We can continue with the status quo for all I care, but don't start deleting
other people's work just because you don't like me.
Jani this has nothing to do with liking or not liking you. Actually I usually
get along just fine with you. I still remember that you were the first core guy
I ever had direct contact with and I also appreciate still how fast you fixed
that IMAP bug I reported back then. But I did not appreciate the actions you
took yesterday. I totally that current trunk is a stumbling block. But I cannot
agree with you first committing something to 5_3 which the RM specifically said
not to merge and then creating a branch without consent. Again there are
commits going into 5_3 now which are for example not being merged in 5_4 atm
and why should people do this? We can find a more sensible time point for the
merge, more importantly we first need to make a decision on dropping current
trunk into a branch or not.
well, when nobody was doing nothing because nobody did not want to be the first
one to do something Jani decided to do something and stir the soup. Sometimes
you need a shock to the system to restart it.
heh .. lets just say a few others have chosen to go a path that isnt about just
causing chaos to force a decision. then again this make these people (i am one
of them (*)) back stabbers. anyways .. if this is the perception .. thats its
ok to commit something into a stable branch that was specifically said to be
left out and as a reaction creating a new branch (instead of at least first
reverting) when people call you out, then uhm .. then nevermind. so why dont we
just shut down this list and just send each other mails via commit log messages?
imho jani's commit access should be revoked until we have sorted out our
release plan for the future, because he has shown that he has no patience to
respect other people's opinions and so we can alleviate him of doing stupid
things to release his anxiety. but i guess i am just being a rule loving german
here .. or am i just the only one with enough guts to say this?
What rules did Jani break? Who sets the rules? The PHP Group?
Andrey
--
PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
