On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 06:47:00 -0500, Josh wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:07:39AM +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > >Am Dienstag, den 09.03.2010, 20:25 -0500 schrieb Seth Vidal: > > > >> I agree, there was obviously a divisive and destructive aspect to that > >> meeting. > >> > >> Jonathan, Do you have any thoughts on what we can do to correct it? > > > >Seth, respect would be a good starting point. > > > >> 20:45:30 <cwickert> I know there are people that will leave Fedora if > >> we decide a policy that forbids major updates. both users and > >> contributors > >> 20:45:42 <skvidal> cwickert: people threatening to leave should leave > >> 20:45:48 <skvidal> orphan your packages and go > >> 20:45:57 <skvidal> I'll be glad to clean up that mess > > While the phrasing may or may not be over the top, I read that more as: > > "We shouldn't be held hostage to various threats. We shouldn't be afraid to > try something because a vocal few are ranting against it." > > I could, of course, be very wrong. However threatening to leave the project > if various things aren't done exactly one's way isn't very respectful either. I can agree with that last sentence in parts. Please don't forget the order of incidents, however. First the early-warning system with hundreds of messages and multiple threads, which made several packagers think "do they want to ruin the community packaging project?", and several expressed their criticism. *Afterwards* the more concrete proposals that ignored the criticism and provoked further reactions from packagers, since it is only natural that in project of volunteers that not everyone accepts the inevitable. In return, the FESCo and FPB member quoted above has opted for "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" tactics. With an additional blog entry. And another one attempted at public humiliation even. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
