Danny Backx wrote: > This is probably what I get for trusting people. > > I feel utterly betrayed. Pedro has just kicked me out of my own project, > and he's done it for the wrong reasons. > > You've got to be kidding... Your project? Let's get this straight before anything else! I start the CeGCC project based on previous work from Craig, Mamaich and Rainer. Fix and extend lots of stuff. I fix binutils, gdb, gcc, mingw, newlib, and whatnot; you commit a few lines of code, and you own it... A few months after I started CeGCC, you show up on newlib's list (*), and get to know my project. You ask to join offering help in docs, www and testing. I let you in. Berlios starts having trouble, and we decide we need to move somewhere else. Before I have a saying, you already created the CeGCC project here at sourceforge. It was ok, it got things going. But saying you own the project, just because you were the one to request it at sourceforge, eventhough the codebase was the same, and the project name was the same, is ... I don't know what to call it.
(I don't really like to think that I own the project, since 99.999% of the code was taken from other projects, written by hundreds of individuals and companies. And besides, All the code that gets submitted to binutils, gcc and gdb, is copyrighted FSF (you need to sign copyright papers to submit code, which I have)). (*) http://sources.redhat.com/ml/newlib/2006/msg00269.html > I've tried to be calm about it (see my messages below), but I have every > reason to be angry, because some of the things he writes are, in my > opinion, not true. I've had no message to revert Nuno's submission. Many > of the rules Pedro imposes are unwritten and left for me to find out > after he got angry with me. > > Care to say which rules are these? The (standard and pretty well documented) ChangeLog writing style? The version of autoconf to use? The patch reviewing process? All of these things that are standard in gnu tools development? Do you read the lists of gcc, newlib, gdb, binutils, etc, etc? I am trying to follow the same process here, since a lot of the code we have will eventually be sent upstream. If we use the same methods, it will be easier for us to submit it. Is it the rule about having MSDN pointers available to w32api/include and mingw/include ? It is the same rule used in cygwin/mingw. They have been using the same rule since ever. The rule exists to protect us from legal problems with MSFT. Do you need these rules written? Ok, here it goes: ChangeLogs: http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Change-Logs.html GCC rules: http://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html Autoconf version: http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html About MSDN pointers: http://www.mingw.org/MinGWiki/index.php/SubmitPatches (particularly section 8 of the above). --- Since you joined the project, you have been trying to do it your way. That was not what I excepted from you when you joined the project. Eg: I said several times that the wiki was the intended form of documentation, but you went on to create your own version of it. I was using a version scheme of 0.0.1 -> 0.0.2 -> 0.03 and then announced that the next release was supposed to be 0.1.0 so we would have a patch level number left. But you went ahead and created a different and confusing alternative numbering scheme for linux, totally ignoring binary compatibility, and spread the FUD idea that building under linux and cygwin where totally different things. There are so many things that you've done wrong, that I tried to explain, but most of the time you just said OK, and then repeated the mistake. Eventually, a time came when I couldn't take it anymore. > Since Saturday Pedro has given me the silent treatment; the message is > clear. > > Sorry, I was away working at a technical exhibition since Thursday. I only had network for limited periods of time. I was waiting for you to go look at your spam folder and dig out the messages, or, ask me to resend them. You didn't. You didn't seem worried about making Nuno work for no reason. You made no comments on anything else I said on my private email (that you now copied to a public list, so everyone would feel pity from you. But you forgot to send dozens of others too). You weren't expecting me to just back out because you asked without further actions, in around 25 words split in two emails. I really wished you had done things differently since our last conversation. We talked about patch reviewing, and you wined about me wasting your time. Then I had to spend several hours fixing your commit, and you still wined when I said you used the wrong tools. I told you how to do it right, and you re-wined. Then I pointed you to written docs explaining how things are supposed to be done. Docs that are very easily found, and you stopped wining. You wasted *my* time. I could post here too a lot of our private correspondence, but I don't think that is a correct thing to do. > So is mine. This is farewell. I see no point in trying to collaborate > when there's no trust. > > Right. You wanted a blank carpet, to be able to do whatever you wanted, but without understanding the implications. I have tried to guide you, I really have, but I seem to have failed... Maybe it was really my fault... Sigh... What I was hoping for, was that you started posting patches to the mailing list, and then after a while I was going to give you SVN access again. Now you totally blew it. I am very, very sorry you made this public. > With regrets, > > Danny > > P.S. My project http://sf.net/projects/wince-xcompile was created > December 2005. Pedro's http://developer.berlios.de/projects/cegcc was > created January 2006. We joined, and then moved to SF when Berlios's > service was bad. Naively, I gave Pedro Admin rights after having setup > the new site. And as of a couple of days ago, he abused those rights to > take away my (1) mailing list admin, (2) project admin, and (3) > developer access. If that isn't betrayal then I don't know what is. > Re: P.S.: I suggest everyone to go download his project, and see for yourselves where's the "merge/joining" he is talking about. I am very sorry this came to this terms... Cheers, Pedro Alves --- Note: Copies of private correspondence below. > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > >> From: Danny Backx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: Pedro Alves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Bcc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: mailing list admin ? >> Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2006 16:52:39 +0100 >> >> Well ? >> >> Danny >> >> On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 13:14 +0100, Danny Backx wrote: >> >>> I have seen no such messages. As you may be aware, not all E-mail >>> arrives perfectly in this age of spam. >>> >>> Please reconsider. >>> >>> Danny >>> >>> On Sat, 2006-11-04 at 12:01 +0000, Pedro Alves wrote: >>> >>>> Danny Backx escreveu: >>>> >>>>> Pedro, >>>>> >>>>> The admin password for the cegcc-devel mailing list doesn't work any >>>>> more, and my name appears to be gone but yours is on it twice. >>>>> >>>>> Has something gone wrong ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Yes, you have. >>>> >>>> You failed to reply to private mails from me and from Nuno about his >>>> patches. You made >>>> Nuno work for no reason. I've asked you to revert his new headers, but >>>> you failed to do so. >>>> I worry about what you are capable of doing behind my back. >>>> >>>> I've got tired of the "damn, I'll have to clean that up" feeling every >>>> time you commit something. >>>> I thought it would be clear to you by now, that cegcc doesn't use, and >>>> *shouldn't* use mingw/include headers. >>>> It uses *newlib* headers. They can't be mixed. So, no __CEGCC__ patches >>>> on mingw/include. Period. >>>> Why do you think there are comments about keeping the files in sync with >>>> cygwin? It is exactly the same >>>> issue there. They use newlib too. >>>> >>>> I wish you had started doing things right after the last talk we had >>>> about patch reviewing, but you failed >>>> to do so. >>>> That last patch to fix gcc profiling support, with your name on the >>>> ChangeLog entry, was just rude. >>>> Putting your name on work you haven't done, is just disrespectful. >>>> That was the drop that made the glass spill. >>>> >>>> You will certainly consider my actions rude, I'm sorry, but that is the >>>> way it is going to be. >>>> From now on, you are welcome to contribute patches through the mailing >>>> list instead. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Pedro Alves >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Cegcc-devel mailing list Cegcc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cegcc-devel
