Just a general point: I think people are being a bit harsh on Stuart in this thread. I'm picking up on Chris's post as I'm interested in the releng-related stuff, but this isn't exclusively about his responses.
Stuart Herbert wrote: > On 11/29/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I'm sorry, but how the hell do you know? You are not a member of >> Release Engineering, and have *NO CLUE* what we do over there. What we >> release isn't the only thing we do. > > Then this is a great opportunity to set the record straight, by > explaining what server-oriented work releng do with each release. > I agree with Stuart on this. While released stuff is of course not all any team does in software development, it is all that anyone external usually sees, or associates with that group. >> Luckily, I'm not asking you. Instead, I'm asking interested developers >> to assist us in making what we plan on doing much more viable. Feel >> free to sit over there and naysay until you're blue in the face. We'll >> be over here getting something accomplished via teamwork. > > Odd; I'm trying to get involved, by providing feedback and asking > questions. > Again I think Stuart is right; he's asking questions which while they might sound irritating if you've explained the stuff before, should be treated with respect, or at least basic courtesy. >> Just because we didn't take the time out to stop and make >> sure you were personally comfortable with the change doesn't mean we >> didn't prepare for it and announce it. > > I'm sorry that you've gone with the "I always know best, you're a > fucking chump so shut the fuck up" type of response :( That seems to > be your answer of choice to all feedback these days. > It's obviously something to do with you personally Stuart, and no I'm not trying to insult you by that. I think you'd have been better quoting this bit: >> If you're "testing the crap" out of something, but only in an >> exclusively desktop-oriented way ... well, that can only really be >> partial testing, can't it? > > Again, you don't know what you're talking about, so I'd really > appreciate it if you just shut the hell up until you decide to get > yourself informed on the facts. > AFAIC that response is unacceptable, and should have been called, rather than Stuart's understandable upset at being dealt with in such a manner. > I'm sorry you feel that my input isn't welcome in your world. And that is exactly why we don't need such responses; it just switches people off, who are genuinely (and politely) trying to contribute. Wrt others not understanding, it's much simpler to write a one-liner explaining where they're going wrong, rather than slagging them off, which only has negative consequences. Disclaimer: I don't know all the background in terms of prior discussion which may have led people to deal with Stuart so nastily. TBH I don't think it really matters; from the outside it looks like bashing someone who seems to be asking reasonable questions and making valid points, at least within the context of the discussion. There have been comparisons with ciaranm, but again, I've seen tirades against him when he had seemed (to me) to be asking reasonable questions. In summary, I'd just like to say that if you think someone's missing a basic point, can you please either put him/her straight or just ignore them. The bad manners can only put others off. A wider point is that the record may be set straight, as Stuart puts it, by responding with info rather than an insult, but that's only for that *one* discussion. I guess I'm wondering whether documentation people read this stuff, and if so, couldn't any points that get made be fed back into docs? So in this case, as an example, if more info came from releng with regard to what they do in terms of server stuff that _wasn't_ already in the docs, the docs would be updated. And of course, if it /were/ in the docs, a simple link could take the place of an insult. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
