On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Carl Sorensen <[email protected]> wrote: > As far as I know, I'm not a member of -hackers. I get a not-found error > whenever I click on any of the links. > > I don't have any emails from -hackers in my inbox or saved mails. I don't > have -hackers in my Contacts list. So I'm not part of the in-crowd in this > discussion.
Oh. Then please accept my apologies. I assumed you were because, in a private conversation I had with Graham (which I'm sure he'll forgive me for quoting), he referred to -hackers as "a private+archived mailing list for extremely well-known developers like Han-Wen, Jan, me, Carl, and Neil". By the way, I didn't want to raise the question of the criteria, but I am bound to wonder why it is that you are not a member of this list. To quote David's speculative criteria, you do seem perfectly "sane/safe/trustable/reasonable" to me. -- On the other hand, with all the respect I have for John, who is also a good friend of mine, I believe he still is a member of -hackers although hasn't been doing any visible work on LilyPond for months, and was dismissed by Graham as the Translations Meister. (Since I do know John, I also know how unfair what I've just said is: although he hasn't been doing *visible* work on LilyPond, he's actually been spending all this time working on something that will be of great help to us when he unveils it. But I hope I've made my point: where to draw the line between people deemed worthy of the -hackers list and other people?) > I'm sorry that my response was disturbing to you. I was not trying to be > disrespectful or condescending. I certainly did not intend my response > to expand or continue negative feelings. > > I'm trying to recognize this issue as a real issue, but one that would be > better discussed at a specific time in the future. I understand better now what you had in mind. As you may have understood, I have a hard time not interpreting things as "go play with your pointless doc-patches and let the grown-ups do serious 2.14 business". I never actually thought you could be implying such a thing, but the mere fact that it crossed my mind illustrates how I am feeling (and have been for some time) towards the development team: I am obviously on edge. > I have reread that email. It asks for a lot of work to be done relative to > the -hackers list. But the hope is to figure out what the hackers list is > and how we use it formally in the GOP, after 2.14 is out, instead of right > now. I'm not sure about the amount of work and discussions implied, but I do trust your judgement on that. > Would such a patch be helpful? LGTM :-) By all accounts, I wish someone from -hackers had proposed this patch (or better yet, a more informative one?) instead of you. Rather than dismissing every possible concerns altogether, it would have been much appreciated if someone had simply thrown us a bone, e.g. a list of names and/or informal criteria and/or some background, history about this list, the why, the how, the when etc. I obviously hurt Graham's feeling, which was certainly not what I was aiming for, but I do hope we can work together and put an end to this situation (and again: like David, I am not referring to the division between people who are subscribed to -hackers and other people, but between those who "know" about it and those who do not). Cheers, Valentin. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
