Normally, I don't consider it my place to comment on a developer's parting words, and I don't disagree with most of what Robert has said, and there is no question that techically he is extremely brilliant, and that he has made a big contribution to Bacula, particularly in the Windows area.
However, there are a few items where I feel he may have presented an incorrect interpretation that I would like to clarify. See below. On Saturday 28 April 2007 09:14, Robert Nelson wrote: > I have been involved in the Bacula project for a year now. > > > > The first 9 months I spent working 6-7 days a week, 8+ hours a day: > > porting Storage and the Director to Windows > > rewriting the installer > > redesigning the Windows build process and contributed > improvements to the Unix build > > fixing numerous Windows-specific as well as general bugs > > redesigning, simplifying and improving both the Windows and the > core code > > porting the regression tests to Windows > > migrating the Source Management from CVS to Subversion > > > > I followed all the coding conventions, reviewed every significant change > with Kern, and did everything possible to comply with all rules (both those > outlined in the Developer's Guide as well as those inferred from reading > between the lines in Kern's emails). > > > > I spent thousands of dollars putting together a test lab for all the tape > loader, tape drive and CD changer technologies. > > > > During the last eight weeks I've been working on reproducing and fixing a > tape drive on Windows bug and writing a new monitor application for Windows. > > > > I've watched the email lists for bugs that are specific to the new > components I've added as well as helping users with Windows specific install > problems. > > > > I also worked on a couple of other open source projects with which I'm > involved. > > > > Oh, and I caught up on some of my work that actually produces income. > > > > The one thing I didn't do was update the manual. > > > > As a result, my admin privileges for the Bacula project were removed and I > must submit all my changes as patches for review. Two points here: first, we are talking about a Source Forge "project manager" status. Recently so that Robert could complete the CVS -> SVN conversion project, I gave Robert project manager status for Bacula on Source Forge. I did the for a specific task, not as something permanent since there are already three people serving as "project manager" for Bacula. As I promised the Free Software Foundation Europe to do before June, I recently (as I mentioned on recent email) removed all "developers" who have not signed the FSFE FLA (with a few exceptions). While doing this, I put Robert back to standard developer status, which seemed to me totally unworthy of any special mention. As of this moment, Robert has full write access to the SVN as do all other developers. I have never asked Robert to submit all his changes as patches for review. I did explicitly ask him to sumit a patch to me so that we could review it for possible inclusion into 2.2.0. This is *exactly* the same status that all other developers have at this stage. I have asked them all to submit to me any new features, but they can continue to work on fixing bugs. This is completely normal, I have been doing the same thing for five years now. Just this morning, Robert committed one or two bug fixes without notifying me (which is perfectly fine with me), so I have a hard time understanding this complaint. Just so there is no confusion, I have said that I will be moving to a mode where I do review all patches in more detail, and I have said that certain developers already use such a system, and that it works well, at least for me. This is something I am currently considering and I have not imposed it on Robert or anyone else. > > > > I've done my best to work with Kern and I thought everything was great until > the last week when he started threatening me with removing all the software > (Windows Server version) I'd just devoted the better part of the last year > working on. This is not at all what I have "threatened". I was talking about not officially building certain server binaries, and I long ago rejected that idea. > > > > I'm not sure what I've done to upset him, but I'm not prepared to work in > this environment. > > > > One of the nice things about Open Source is that if you don't like the rules > you can not only take your marbles and go home, you can also take the other > guy's marbles too. > > > > I'll be looking into providing a supported and compatible version of the > software for Windows. Over time as the core code improves and diverges I'll > probably also release versions for the other platforms too. This will undoubtedly result in duplication of effort, but so be it. If you do modify the code and particularly in the case of any divergences, please remember to rename your binaries and remove all references to Bacula (tm) to avoid any confusion in user's minds with the Bacula project. > > > > I will also make sure that I pick up bug fixes from the Bacula project. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
