On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 6:25 PM Niccolo Brogi <nkkollaw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Nope. > > Everything started because I was called a "backseat viewer", and therefore > not allowed to say that scheduled releases are good. After that I was > replying to that attitude, and not about whether rolling releases are > better (which I had an extremely open mind about). > I'm afraid you are conflating "criticism" with "purposedly being a true pain in the neck". If people are not happy with unsheduled releases, I would (naively?) expect them to begin with stating that they think this is wrong and then, politely or not so much, asking why that is the case and what is the reason for not switching to rolling. You never really asked. You started the conversation with a claim that we should pay attention to users (like we don't, contrary to a mountain of evidence) and that we tell them to f*** off. What did you expect to happen next? (For the record, I personally would prefer the rolling model for GIMP, but it is currently not quite realistic. Besides, so far, most people who spoke up seem to be happy with the new release model where new things get ported to the stable branch and then released every month or two.) In almost a week of this ongoing "conversation" you still haven't asked why we don't do rolling and scheduled releases. This is exactly how much constructive your "criticism" is. And I'm still willing to explain why, publicly. I'm only replying to this, because here you are again pretending that we (or me personally) attack critics. We don't. All that happened here is that I was sarcastic over yet another case of someone being unnecessarily nasty to the point of insult. I don't know how many times I have to repeat it: criticism is welcome and studied, but insults, shouting, and use of expletives aren't. Please learn the difference. We cannot have a constructive conversation until you do. Alex > > The message you quoted is way after things started going bad. > > As for your comparison with Starbucks, I don't abuse Starbucks employees > and neither I abuse GIMP's staff. > > I also don't care about harsh words, I'm not a little snowflake. I just > want to know if GIMP is represented by Alexandre like he implies, and if > the GIMP team is OK with attacking newbies and critics of GIMP saying > they're backseat drivers that are not worth listening to and not worth > explaining things. > > I'm not the only one who shares the view that in GIMP there is this > attitude of "if you didn't make it, you're not allowed to talk bad about > it". > > If that's the culture at GIMP, I'm not gonna cry. Just say it. > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 16:00 C R <cajhne@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
