Hi
And now, in what case is it acceptable to mark an email asking about such an
issue as spam?
That is very likely a false positive by some email filter, and not
anything Bastien did.
Ankit
On 24/09/21 11:29, Ryan Inch via Bf-committers wrote:
Thanks for your quick reply Bastian. My email wasn't a prompt to be
defensive but a request for clarification from Dalai as the Blender
Development Coordinator. Depending on what Dalai says, I'll follow up
with your points if need be because this is not about me but how
community developers are treated.
Dalai, as Blender Development Coordinator, one specific request from the
Epic MegaGrant was to make Blender more professional. I and other
community devs and members do not think this kind of notation is
professional. It also disincentivizes engagement between core devs and
community devs who do consider this a type of attack.
So again, my question to you as the Blender Development Coordinator is
'In what case is it acceptable for a developer to put something like
"Spent time on re-explaining/re-investigating T9599 (sigh…)." in their
official weekly development notes?' And now, in what case is it
acceptable to mark an email asking about such an issue as spam? I was
under the impression that personal attacks were not tolerated?
Ryan
On 2021-09-21 06:00 AM, bf-committers-requ...@blender.org wrote:
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 09:20:11 +0200
From: Bastien Montagne <montagn...@wanadoo.fr>
To: Ryan Inch via Bf-committers <bf-committers@blender.org>
Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] *** SPAM *** Weekly Development Notes
Followup
Message-ID: <c6100f56-9813-aebe-01ae-5e3b70f57...@wanadoo.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Hi Ryan,
Not sure how you see that as a personal attack? Fact is, I think
spending half a day on something does earns it a note in the weekly
report.
And yes, I was frustrated spending time having to demo the issue after
explaining it's cause/source, finding again the exact use case
triggering it, rebuilding both branch and master to ensure it was proper
example, etc. We all have (tight) schedules and I was frustrated this
was considered high priority enough to take it over more pressing
matters for Blender 3.0 upcoming BCon2.
I know that expressing personal frustration may not be a good idea, but
that does not in any case make it a personal attack, sorry if you felt
it like that.
Cheers,
Bastien.
On 9/21/21 8:49 AM, Ryan Inch via Bf-committers wrote:
Hello Dalai,
I missed reading Bastien's weekly notes last week or I would have
brought this issue up then. In Bastien's notes for Week 425 - 09/04
to 09/10, one of his notes is this: "Spent time on
re-explaining/re-investigating T9599 (sigh…)."
In what case is it acceptable for a developer to put something like
this in their official weekly development notes? I was under the
impression that personal attacks were not tolerated? (And for the
record it's D9599 not T)
Ryan
_______________________________________________
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
------------------------------
End of Bf-committers Digest, Vol 993, Issue 1
*********************************************
_______________________________________________
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
_______________________________________________
Bf-committers mailing list
Bf-committers@blender.org
List details, subscription details or unsubscribe:
https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
