Having been invoked twice now in this thread, I feel compelled to comment. I guess that seems to be a common enough weakness in this community, right? In this case, I feel it's justified to reply to you because you really don't seem to get why people have a problem with your behavior, and I think you deserve a chance to understand those reasons and remedy that behavior.
I'm also posting it to the mailing list, because I think it's worthwhile to reflect on how these points apply to each of us, in order to be more responsible participants in this community. I have no interest in discussing the expulsion process itself here. But let me be clear, Sven: I enjoy working with most developers in Debian; for the most part, I enjoy working with any developer who isn't totally incompetent. But I don't enjoy working with you, because your competence does not outweigh your consistent personalizing of disagreements. Andres approached me about supporting his request for expulsion before he sent the (public, inappropriate) mail that started this stupid thread, and I was unwilling to give him that support because I'm uncomfortable with arbitrary punishments for unspecified crimes and because I believe that anyone capable of mastering Debian packaging is also capable of learning to work together in a community. But it is in fact my belief that your behavior is sufficiently destructive that if the choice was between taking the good with the bad, or having you leave, I would honestly choose for you to leave. I feel awful about writing that, because I know how it would feel if someone wrote that about me. But it's the truth, and I don't see any reason that it *needs* to be true. So if you really do want to work together with this community (which I believe you do), please listen to and consider what I have to say, instead of looking for ways to blame the behaviors I'm describing on the people around you -- because telling me how much you think *I* suck isn't going to persuade me of anything. First of all, what is this? On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 07:21:09PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 07:33:35PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 07:51:18PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:04:50PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:08:27PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 08:51:43PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 10:32:40PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 10:40:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 12:15:49AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: Do you understand that this mailing list is *not* the venue in which decisions on developer expulsions take place? Do you understand that you don't actually have to reply to *every single message* on a subject to make your point -- especially when you've made that same point, in the same forum, only a little while before? (Maybe there are some people on these mailing lists who have Alzheimer's disease, but we shouldn't assume this is the common case!) Do you understand that the fact that you *do* reply to every single message in a thread is something that makes people not want to deal with you? Nobody wants to try to have a discussion with somebody who is going to insist on having the last word. It's easier to ignore you and put up with occasional sniping from you about how we're not listening than it is to try to have a conversation with you on an issue that you feel strongly about. This is bad for Debian; it means you miss out on feedback from a lot of your peers, and it means a lot of developers avoid joining teams where they would be working with you. Others have made similar comments in this thread; I'm not the only one who thinks this posting pattern is a problem. Do you actually think that this is an effective means of winning an argument? It isn't, unless you count "everyone else walks away in disgust" as winning. If you haven't done so already, please consider which of the posting patterns in this blog entry applies: http://www.kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/thread_patterns-2005-10-27-00-53.html > What Andres is reproaching me, is that i was too vocal in my disput with jonas > (and some previous disputes also with some others), and there he is right. I > was at a level of frustration which made me so irrational i used some (too) > strong words speaking to jonas and later vorlon. I notice though that jonas > called me names too previously, but i am trully baffled about the issue with > vorlon, since, maybe due to english not being my native tongue, it was > interpreted as badly, i meant that as mostly in a joking tone, altough i > failed to add a smiley or something (he was speaking about me and jonas, i > asked him a question about it and he left, so i said something like "bah, > coward", which i really really was not thinking could offend someone, and if > so i apologize for it). For the benefit of those not on #debian-kernel, here's the full sequence of events: - I left the channel last week because it had been taken over by the inane bickering between Sven and Jonas. Since I already had a front row seat to this on debian-ctte, I didn't need to see more of the same on IRC. - I re-joined the channel yesterday after the TC bug had been resolved. - I asked whether I had missed anything, and was informed that Sven and Jonas were now arguing over *proper changelog crediting* of the TC fix. - I made a smartass comment about the possibility of the changelog issue also being reassigned to the TC, and a subsequent need to request reimbursement from SPI for some artillery. - Sven made the accusatory comment that Andres quoted in his original mail. - I took this as a sign that the #debian-kernel channel S/N ratio had not improved, and left unceremoniously. I was not offended to know that Sven called me a coward, whether in jest or not; I think it's healthy for us to all have friends in the community that we can vent to when we're frustrated about dealing with other developers, and make comments to that we wouldn't make to those other developers' faces. I only regret that Sven misjudged how sympathetic the audience was that he made this comment to. But Sven, I really can't understand how you would think your *first* comment could be taken as a joke, when it suggests exactly the same sort of polarizing, with-me-or-against-me personalization that seems to happen so often in discussions with you. After just getting done with the frustration of trying to mediate the yaird issue between you and Jonas as part of the TC, during which you were *repeatedly* asked to refrain from personal attacks, the last thing I wanted was to get pulled into the middle of another personal dispute between you two over something as *minor* as credit in a changelog entry. The personal attacks being sent to debian-ctte were such a distraction from the technical discussion that it even led Ian Jackson to suggest ruling against you only on the grounds that you were being uncooperative! Do you understand that this is *not* an uncommon sentiment, and that being confrontational and combative does bias people against you no matter how correct your technical arguments may be? Do you realize that the only reason I was personally able to overcome this bias in the TC discussion was that a) I felt a duty to do so as a member of the technical committee, and b) I was aware of Jonas's own combative role in the kernel team? (Yes, criticizing you for being off-topic does *not* imply taking Jonas's side in the argument!) > I commented that this was not correct, which lead to Andres asking for my > removal. Er... which brings us to another problem that makes me (and others) not want to deal with you: gross mischaracterization of others' positions. Why would you conclude that Andres did this because you "commented that this was not correct"? He gave his reasons for the request, and factual corrections were certainly not mentioned there. Other examples of judgemental, unsubstantiated assertions about people's "true" motives, just from this thread: > Yeah, well. I waited almost three month for something to happen on that bug > report, and nothing ever came of it. I also note that jonas is not excempt > from the fault, and that other had had trouble dealing with him, even if you > didn't know that when you made your hasty judgement. Why do you think this is a hasty judgement? Andres himself has said he thought about this for a long time. > > - I've seen him several times reject good or even optimum solutions > > to problems, upon which a fair number of other people agreed, just > > for them going against his own personal agenda; which is, oook, > > something not so uncommon in this project, albeit very very > > undesirable. > please provide backing for this diffamation, especially the accusation of not > having the best of debian in mind, but a personal agenda. Why do you view it as a defamation to say that you have a personal agenda? Why do you think having a personal agenda conflicts with having Debian's best interest in mind? I know I have a personal agenda; I sometimes have to choose between my personal goals in Debian, and what I think is best for the project as a whole, because I don't have infinite time to spend on everything I want to. Why should I feel insulted when someone says I have a personal agenda when I know that I still have Debian's best interests at heart, even when I have a different idea of what those best interests are than someone else might? Do you think that filing critical bugs against make-kpkg whenever it breaks Pegasos systems, and accusing the make-kpkg maintainer of misdeed when they aren't fixed immediately, is in the best interest of Debian? Do you think it's a coincidence that most people who don't work on Pegasos systems disagree with you about some of these bug severities? > Notice also that i am still expecting excuses on how you threated me in april > last year, when i almost was brought to leave the project due to the abuse i > got at the time, but i really am not expecting them anymore. Ever since i have > questioned my involvement in debian, and after 8 years of participation, i > have to say that issues got worse and worse the last year since a few of you > guys used me as scapegoat to vent all their frustration on the delayed sarge > release. Until you actually refute the evidence presented in <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg00199.html> showing that the lack of transition in d-i to the kernel-latest packages for powerpc, and the subsequent delays in the d-i release candidate, were *not* the fault of the ftpmasters, I think that's the last word *I* have to say on that subject. But when did anyone ever try to blame you for *all* frustration with the delayed sarge release? Do you really think that it's wrong for people to point out when decisions you've made *do* cause delays to a team's schedule? I would appreciate it if you would think about these questions and answer them, and use this as an opportunity to improve your approach to conflicts in Debian so that some good comes out of this thread. I would appreciate it if others would consider how these observations apply to them as well. I'm sure no one on this mailing list is perfect... -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
