On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 8:14:44 PM UTC+3 Matthias Koeppe wrote:
I do understand that the new committee is still learning how to recognize
and handle abuse; it's a complicated and challenging topic to master. In
the meantime, as I have asked the committee in private already, more
Dear all,
The Code of Conduct Committee considered the issue and found no need for
David to recuse himself as requested.
We would like to use this opportunity to clarify that messages sent by any
of us and signed as “The Code of Conduct Committee” have been approved by
the entire
I have asked David Roe to recuse himself from any further
discussions/actions involving me in the CoCC.
The persistent refusal to make a distinction between *abusive conduct* and
*calling out abuse* has caused too much damage already.
Matthias
On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 9:28:40 PM UTC-7
We have received messages from several people that the level of discord on
display between Dima and Matthias makes them feel uncomfortable
participating on this email list. To protect the community from this
acrimony, we are for now restricting Dima and Matthias to moderated
contributions on
> 4. Please vote -1 on https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36580,
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/36753, and
https://github.com/sagemath/sage/pull/37138, which attempt to obstruct the
modularization project and the mechanism for the distribution on PyPI.
Please refrain from such
Reported.
On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 3:39:56 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 6:14 PM Matthias Koeppe
> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 6:49:11 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org
>> wrote:
>>
>> We have carefully reviewed [...]
>>
>> We therefore disagree
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 6:14 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 6:49:11 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org wrote:
>
> We have carefully reviewed [...]
>
> We therefore disagree with characterizing opposing opinions as “artificial
> friction”, “hostile demands”, or an “attempt
On 10 April 2024 21:50:43 CEST, Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
>On Monday, April 8, 2024 at 5:19:02 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
>
>On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 7:19 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote:
>
> You will find the comments in these PRs instructive -- also as
>illustration for a (long overdue)
On Monday, April 8, 2024 at 5:19:02 PM UTC-7 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 7:19 PM Matthias Koeppe wrote:
You will find the comments in these PRs instructive -- also as
illustration for a (long overdue) *discussion about governance and review
standards* in the Sage project.
On Wednesday, April 10, 2024 at 6:49:11 AM UTC-7 julian...@fsfe.org wrote:
We have carefully reviewed [...]
We therefore disagree with characterizing opposing opinions as “artificial
friction”, “hostile demands”, or an “attempt to sabotage”.
Such allegations will have no effect other than to
Please don't!
+1 for sure
> The modularization project (making pip-installation packages that contain
portions of the sage library) started years ago with a general consensus of
the sage community. Matthias led the project and did most of hard works.
Many others did not care much about
Matthias,
We have carefully reviewed the arguments people have brought for and
against the disputed PRs and find it credible that both sides have genuine
concerns. We therefore disagree with characterizing opposing opinions as
“artificial friction”, “hostile demands”, or an “attempt to
Please don't!
Martin
On Wednesday 10 April 2024 at 00:39:39 UTC+2 Dima Pasechnik wrote:
> I think I will quit the Sage project as soon as decisions on technical
> merits of PRs and issues will start to be taken in a nakedly political way.
>
> I am very strongly against any political overtones
I think I will quit the Sage project as soon as decisions on technical merits
of PRs and issues will start to be taken in a nakedly political way.
I am very strongly against any political overtones in these matters - it
reminds me all too well what's wrong is in academia in general.
Dima
Hi,
Reviewing a PR is a technical work, but voting on a disputed PR has a
political element. So I want to make a political remark concerning most of
the disputed PRs.
The modularization project (making pip-installation packages that contain
portions of the sage library) started years ago with
Dima,
I am writing as a member of the Code of Conduct concerning one particular
phrase from your message
https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/Wjw2wcvgf8k/m/ynwiz66_AQAJ :
> This will force Matthias to reconsider his priorities, and enable other
voices to be heard. So far, Matthias refuses
Thank you, Matthias, for drawing attention to votes on tickets that have
gained "disputed" state and were not getting much attention. If we're going
to decide these tickets by voting, then having a more representative voting
population should help in getting a more representative result.
Thank
On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 7:19 PM Matthias Koeppe
wrote:
> I need your help on these PRs. Please vote.
>
> Special expertise is not required for voting. You will find the comments
> in these PRs instructive -- also as illustration for a (long overdue)
> *discussion
> about governance and review
Dear Sage developers,
I need your help on these PRs. Please vote.
Special expertise is not required for voting. You will find the comments in
these PRs instructive -- also as illustration for a (long overdue) *discussion
about governance and review standards* in the Sage project.
*1. Please
19 matches
Mail list logo
