On Sun, 15 May 2016 08:40:39 +0900 Aaron Bauman <b...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Saturday, May 14, 2016 9:54:11 AM JST Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Aaron Bauman <b...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Friday, May 13, 2016 4:52:09 PM JST Ian Delaney wrote: > > >> On Sat, 7 May 2016 23:25:58 +0200 > > >> > > >> Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > >> > Do you seriously expect this code to work? How about testing? Or > > >> > reading diffs before committing? > > > > > > Absolutely nothing wrong was said here. Obviously the code was not tested > > > and Michal pointed that out very plainly. > > > > It is actually possible to communicate both plainly and politely at > > the same time. This does not require sacrificing any commitment to > > quality at all. Really the only downside is having more of an > > appearance of professionalism. > > Please enlighten me as to what was impolite here? The strong language of > "seriously" or definitively stating that the individual did not perform the > necessary QA actions before committing? Both of which are completely called > for and appropriate. No vulgarity, insults, or demeaning words were used. > How would you have responded professionally? I thought his response was pretty tame actually. If you break the tree because you couldn't be bothered to do the barest minimum of testing you absolutely deserve to be called out on it. But if you guys just want to hug it out that's cool too. --
pgp6v204Sg7ZU.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
