Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 12:30:20AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: On Saturday 01 March 2008, Robert Millan wrote: Alternatively, if you can setup ACLs that would restrict my commit rights to win32-loader/ directory, I would feel comfortable with that. I would not. I would feel extremely uncomfortable if we had to micromanage things like that. All I'm looking for is some selfrestraint and selfcontrol. I can use selfcontrol, but it is you who threatened to remove my commit perms, which is not about selfcontrol. My point is, that if you want to handle this by using technical restrictions, I have no problem with the one described above. -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 12:13:43AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: Common sense is all I ask for. And the common sense is: do not trample over components for which you are not a lead maintainer, especially for components (or ports) that _do_ have active maintainers. Give others the time to respond and do not commit unless you have _explicit_ agreement from those maintainers. You're missrepresenting facts. I may not have done everything perfectly, but there's a grayscale between black and white and you're skipping it completely. Just like Otavio, I _do_ see your contributions, but I also strongly feel that you're often way too pushy, both in discussions (like over gnash), Same thing again. Does the fact that I stepped back from my request based on judgement from the Gnash maintainer tell you something? Besides, I don't think I should restrain myself from giving my *opinion* on components for which I don't even have write access to. migrations (grub2) GRUB is not a D-I component; in Debian it has three maintainers, and we take major decisions by consensus. Besides, the fact that the migration hasn't happened yet should tell you something as well. I have a very string feeling that I cannot trust your judgement because you're always wanting to jump 10 steps ahead, without due considerations of risks and proper timing. As someone who does a lot of coordinating for D-I, I constantly have the feeling that I have to be extra alert for whatever next crazy change you'll want to push past everybody and that's just not a comfortable feeling. Even if I made a minor mistake, which I don't deny, I find it highly disturbing that after making the effort to check things and talking with maintainers over a proposed change, your conclussion is that you can't trust my judgement and that I push for crazy changes (how crazy is to add versatile support?). I'm willing to observe rules when they come in clear messages stating what I may and may not do. And since these have already been clarified in another mail, I have nothing more to add on this regard. OTOH, I find it unpleasant to contribute to D-I when I have to deal with this kind of stressful responses. As it happens, by an unfortunate coincidence your previous response ended up at my former employer's mailbox, which as you may guess was a very inappropiate recipient for your biased description of my behaviour. -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:18:58PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-25 23:44]: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2 and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in). Thanks. Fixed and committed. -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Friday 29 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:18:58PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-25 23:44]: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2 and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in). Thanks. Fixed and committed. Where exactly did anybody give an OK for this to be committed by you? I would say that the comments were at most an invitation to prepare a new patch and submit that for review again. Another example is the commit you did to the manual. You asked for review, but then used a minor comment from someone who's himself not actually part of the team as a justification to commit the change. It would have been much nicer if you'd left a bit more time for the actual maintainers of the manual to respond (especially when you know people are away at a conference). After you already committed I myself no longer saw any point in commenting, so I didn't. I will now probably just rewrite the text if I see a reason to do so. I really totally disagree with the way you appropriate things and am even at this point starting to consider whether your commit access to the D-I SVN repository should just be revoked. Cheers, FJP signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Friday 29 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:18:58PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-25 23:44]: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2 and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in). Thanks. Fixed and committed. Where exactly did anybody give an OK for this to be committed by you? I would say that the comments were at most an invitation to prepare a new patch and submit that for review again. Another example is the commit you did to the manual. You asked for review, but then used a minor comment from someone who's himself not actually part of the team as a justification to commit the change. It would have been much nicer if you'd left a bit more time for the actual maintainers of the manual to respond (especially when you know people are away at a conference). After you already committed I myself no longer saw any point in commenting, so I didn't. I will now probably just rewrite the text if I see a reason to do so. I really totally disagree with the way you appropriate things and am even at this point starting to consider whether your commit access to the D-I SVN repository should just be revoked. Cheers, FJP While I fully agree with your complains and also think that Robert should really be more careful in the future I also think that we all do mistakes and learn from them. He has been very active and tries to make things go fast (as I also do mistakenly sometimes) however this doesn't justify his commit right removal. Mistakes are far from usual misbehaviour and I'm sure Robert will do his best to avoid this to happen again. Am I right Robert? -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 07:31:55PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Friday 29 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:18:58PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-25 23:44]: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2 and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in). Thanks. Fixed and committed. Where exactly did anybody give an OK for this to be committed by you? I would say that the comments were at most an invitation to prepare a new patch and submit that for review again. Another example is the commit you did to the manual. You asked for review, but then used a minor comment from someone who's himself not actually part of the team as a justification to commit the change. It would have been much nicer if you'd left a bit more time for the actual maintainers of the manual to respond (especially when you know people are away at a conference). After you already committed I myself no longer saw any point in commenting, so I didn't. I will now probably just rewrite the text if I see a reason to do so. I really totally disagree with the way you appropriate things and am even at this point starting to consider whether your commit access to the D-I SVN repository should just be revoked. While I fully agree with your complains and also think that Robert should really be more careful in the future I also think that we all do mistakes and learn from them. He has been very active and tries to make things go fast (as I also do mistakenly sometimes) however this doesn't justify his commit right removal. Mistakes are far from usual misbehaviour and I'm sure Robert will do his best to avoid this to happen again. Am I right Robert? Hey, Sorry, I missunderstood. Please, would you tell me which specific rules I should observe for each part of D-I? I understand I can handle win32-loader/ directory freely, but for the rest I really don't know, and was just using common sense. Thanks -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry, I missunderstood. Please, would you tell me which specific rules I should observe for each part of D-I? I understand I can handle win32-loader/ directory freely, but for the rest I really don't know, and was just using common sense. Basically: - every change that isn't done on modules where you're the main developer, needs ack on ml - be even more careful when you change involves string changes (manual, for example) - when we're preparing a release, always ask for ack for changes on d-i svn. Remember the win32-loader upload I complained to you via IRC? -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 11:43:43PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 07:31:55PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Friday 29 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 08:18:58PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr wrote: * Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-25 23:44]: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2 and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in). Thanks. Fixed and committed. Where exactly did anybody give an OK for this to be committed by you? I would say that the comments were at most an invitation to prepare a new patch and submit that for review again. Another example is the commit you did to the manual. You asked for review, but then used a minor comment from someone who's himself not actually part of the team as a justification to commit the change. It would have been much nicer if you'd left a bit more time for the actual maintainers of the manual to respond (especially when you know people are away at a conference). After you already committed I myself no longer saw any point in commenting, so I didn't. I will now probably just rewrite the text if I see a reason to do so. I really totally disagree with the way you appropriate things and am even at this point starting to consider whether your commit access to the D-I SVN repository should just be revoked. While I fully agree with your complains and also think that Robert should really be more careful in the future I also think that we all do mistakes and learn from them. He has been very active and tries to make things go fast (as I also do mistakenly sometimes) however this doesn't justify his commit right removal. Mistakes are far from usual misbehaviour and I'm sure Robert will do his best to avoid this to happen again. Am I right Robert? Hey, Sorry, I missunderstood. Please, would you tell me which specific rules I should observe for each part of D-I? I understand I can handle win32-loader/ directory freely, but for the rest I really don't know, and was just using common sense. Alternatively, if you can setup ACLs that would restrict my commit rights to win32-loader/ directory, I would feel comfortable with that. -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Friday 29 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote: Sorry, I missunderstood. Please, would you tell me which specific rules I should observe for each part of D-I? I understand I can handle win32-loader/ directory freely, but for the rest I really don't know, and was just using common sense. Common sense is all I ask for. And the common sense is: do not trample over components for which you are not a lead maintainer, especially for components (or ports) that _do_ have active maintainers. Give others the time to respond and do not commit unless you have _explicit_ agreement from those maintainers. Just like Otavio, I _do_ see your contributions, but I also strongly feel that you're often way too pushy, both in discussions (like over gnash), migrations (grub2) and commits. I have a very string feeling that I cannot trust your judgement because you're always wanting to jump 10 steps ahead, without due considerations of risks and proper timing. As someone who does a lot of coordinating for D-I, I constantly have the feeling that I have to be extra alert for whatever next crazy change you'll want to push past everybody and that's just not a comfortable feeling. As you may know my prime concern is to keep things reliable and working _while_ still moving forward. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Saturday 01 March 2008, Robert Millan wrote: Alternatively, if you can setup ACLs that would restrict my commit rights to win32-loader/ directory, I would feel comfortable with that. I would not. I would feel extremely uncomfortable if we had to micromanage things like that. All I'm looking for is some selfrestraint and selfcontrol. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
* Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-02-25 23:44]: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 This patch seems to miss an update to the package-list file. You can use the package-list file to specify that this kernel provides ext2 and other modules (i.e. that they are built-in). -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
Any comments on this one? If nobody objects, I'd like to check it in. But I want to be careful not to disrupt the release process for beta1 ... This change implies that linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 will only be buildable on sid untill 2.6.24 migrates; I assume that's not a problem? On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:44:38PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: This patch adds -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6 Note: it may need some additions when #467454 is fixed. -- Robert Millan GPLv2 I know my rights; I want my phone call! DRM What use is a phone call… if you are unable to speak? (as seen on /.) Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/kernel-versions === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/kernel-versions (revision 51573) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/kernel-versions (working copy) @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ # arch version flavour installednamesuffix build-depends armel 2.6.22-3 iop32x 2.6.22-3-iop32x y linux-image-2.6.22-3-iop32x armel 2.6.22-3 ixp4xx 2.6.22-3-ixp4xx y linux-image-2.6.22-3-ixp4xx +armel 2.6.24-1 versatile 2.6.24-1-versatile y linux-image-2.6.24-1-versatile Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/usb-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/usb-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/usb-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include usb-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/loop-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/loop-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/loop-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include loop-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/kernel-image === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/kernel-image (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/kernel-image (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ + Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/fat-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/fat-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/fat-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include fat-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/usb-storage-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/usb-storage-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/usb-storage-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include usb-storage-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/md-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/md-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/md-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include md-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/nic-usb-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/nic-usb-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/nic-usb-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include nic-usb-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/reiserfs-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/reiserfs-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/reiserfs-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include reiserfs-modules Index: packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/crc-modules === --- packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/crc-modules (revision 0) +++ packages/kernel/linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6/modules/armel-versatile/crc-modules (revision 0) @@ -0,0 +1 @@ +#include crc-modules Index:
Re: [PATCH] add -versatile flavour to linux-kernel-di-armel-2.6
On Tuesday 26 February 2008, Robert Millan wrote: Any comments on this one? If nobody objects, I'd like to check it in. But I want to be careful not to disrupt the release process for beta1 ... Please wait until at least either Martin or Joey comment. They are the most active porters for arm(el). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
