[Rubygems-developers] Rubygems Packaging Enhancements and Designs
jftucker at gmail.com
Wed Mar 31 06:00:20 EDT 2010
Now look guys, I don't want to deal with crap like this. Grow up, or release your maintenance positions to me. You can't maintain these packages or help with their development unless you're willing to get involved. Step up, or step down, it's that simple.
As I say below, I don't want to be angry, but a little give and take, rather than you guys breaking every single communication channel I try to open is the only way I can start to fix things. That's a fact of communication, it's a two way process that requires a common transport medium, and I am NOT willing to be a manual email hub just because you're being resistant, I'm putting enough time in trying to arbitrate already. Sadly, it's likely that if this warning is not received with a mature view, then this effort may fail before it's even really begun, in which case, I'll be dealing with the SUSE folks only, as they seem to be the only ones not nit-picking over communications, methods and mediums; instead they're working with me, promptly, and providing plenty of help, even infrastructure. They're on my gold list. Mails like below push you toward the .... list, for exceedingly obvious reasons.
Finally, if you don't agree, please sleep on it, maybe for a week, then come back. If you still feel raw about it, then like I say, give up your maintenance positions, and walk away. I'm not having these arguments *again*, as neither of you can provide a real rationale behind your resistance.
Current open channels:
Direct email - please don't use this for design input, as I need everyone to be on the same channel for that.
Mailing list - sign up, or step down.
Wiki - to keep a central record of longer term decisions, avoiding bikeshed discussion and so on. I want this to be a summary of the facts. I could move this elsewhere, but I'd have to sign up, and so would the rest of the rubygems core team (who are already signed up on github, all of them, for a long time now).
IRC - #rubygems and talking to me directly on freenode (raggi) is fine, although once again, this is purely for a realtime channel, facts need to be persisted to the wiki.
Now I can open up more wiki's at other places (but at least one of us is going to have to give and sign up for anywhere else that's spam resistant). I can open up more IRC channels, but that's not persistent, and not suitable for the long term stuff. I can provide access to Campfire, or Talkerapp, or Teamvox, or etherpad, or a gist, or rubyforge wikis, or, or, or, or. They all have something in common, someone out of the lot of you, or more, is going to have to pull a finger out and sign up.
I made a proactive set of (sane) choices based on (good) evidence for what is (commonly) available to our (main) userbase and (all) our maintainers. You're with us, or not. If not, once again, please step down.
I'm willing to listen to rational arguments against my choices, but not being signed up to the rubygems ML when you're responsible for maintaining ports of rubygems packages as non-rubygems or not signing up to github because you're "not sure of the ramifications" are both truly pathetic reasons, and if you feel strongly about those two things you really shouldn't be holding any maintenance positions on these projects, because not doing so leaves you without suitable infrastructure to do so. More than that it should be against maintenance policies of distributions to be so disconnected and irresponsible.
On 31 Mar 2010, at 06:36, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> FYI. It might be better to keep the discussion off-list, then.
> - Lucas
NO. You're involved with rubygems development, whether you like to admit it or not, you need to be on that ML. I'd dig up Debian policies about responsible administration of packages, but you guys are supposed to know those already.
On 31 Mar 2010, at 10:02, Hugh Sasse wrote:
> I can't seem to edit this without a github account. I've not
> worked out all the ramifications of that yet, so not chosen a
> package for github. I know Wikis can't be totally open because
> of what happened to RubyGarden. Hopefully there's a way around
> this. I don't know what the Venn diagram would look like for
> wanted contributors and those that have github accounts.
I've counted to 10.
I've tried really hard to squash the feeling that you're nit-picking.
I've tried to understand a rational reason of where you're coming from.
I don't get it, and whilst I agree with everything else you've said in the mail, my reply to this is presently "grow up".
Security is no excuse.
Mail volume is no excuse.
Professionalism is no excuse.
Cost is no excuse (it's free).
Remember please: HELP ME TO HELP YOU. There are limits to my time and effort on this and discussing philosophical lies about signing up for accounts on MASSIVE well known services is NOT what I am here for.
They handle 10x more open source commits per day than SourceForge, so like I say, grow up, sign up, and lets get down to some /real work/.
Enough said, I'm very sorry if you find this mail upsetting, but you hit a bad button here, as the Debian folks are also currently trying to make me move off the rubygems ML too, because they don't want to sign up. It's PATHETIC, people are nit picking at stuff that's totally irrelevant, and it seems that they're either insane, evangelists, or just trying to wind me up and demoralise my effort to really fix this stuff. I'm here to fix rubygems, not people attitudes. Maturity and professionalism from here on in please, I don't want to be angry anymore. And YES I've been asked to sign up to places plenty of times in professional environments, and I don't give clients hell over it, it's bad for business and bad for karma.
Questions to: support at github.com
More information about the Rubygems-developers