This email comes from kd85.com. contact-hdl: CCOM-138654 person: Wim Vandeputte organization: KD85.com bvba email: w...@kd85.com address: Kasteeldreef 85 city: Lovendegem postal-code: 9920 country: BE phone: +32.478217355
On 08/13/10 13:46, disgrun tled-developers wrote: > Just to keep the mortals in the loop, > > This date to day, on Tuesday the 13th of August 2002, Theo had another fit > and kicked out all the OpenBSD developers for a couple of days or so: > >> Subject: Re: dealing with security issues when Theo is away >> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:25:08 -0600 >> From: Theo de Raadt <dera...@cvs.openbsd.org> >> >> None of this that you posted changes a single thing. >> >> I DID say who was responsible. >> >> Those people were not contacted. >> >> It seems you still don't understand the level of not caring that >> happened. >> >> I am taking a holiday next week. For that time, I think cvs will be >> turned off. >> >> Good god, reading even further, you are so fucking out of touch. >> There are only 3 machines on at my house at the moment, and you start >> talking about OTHER machines? >> >> NOONE PHONED ME. > > And: > >> Subject: And >> Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 17:35:30 -0600 >> From: Theo de Raadt <dera...@cvs.openbsd.org> >> >> If I don't get answers from the evasive developers soon, I am going to >> take this to misc, and I will be very open with naming names. >> >> This is now days of people trying to hide from what happened. > > ------ snip ---- snip ---- > > So Theo shut down all machines in his basement and none of the developers > had any access to the work they doing. > > I'd like to remind people that at this point we lost valuable developers > like Niels Provos which turns out the be one of the few who fully understood > crypto and the security improvements like separation of privileges. Not to > forget Hugh, Aaron and a few others.... Others had their account re-enabled > after groveling. And all that over a misunderstanding that is to blame to > the fact that Theo had no written procedures on how to deal with 'issues'. > When Theo is away, you just 'wing it'. > > Today, we see the same shit all over again... Theo just announced the > following: > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > >> To: hack...@cvs.openbsd.org >> Subject: Tree locked >> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:03:05 -0600 >> From: Theo de Raadt <dera...@cvs.openbsd.org> >> >> I am locking all the trees until the development community decides >> how future releases will be done. >> >> Yes, we all have to do our part. We write code, and some people go >> further by building, and some people go even further by building >> during the release cycle. >> >> But everyone also has to test, or we will ship crap. Yet on random >> releases this process totally falls over, and we end up shipping crap. >> >> Three architectures did not have one of their boot methods checked -- >> yes, they are listed in the TESTS file! -- and the bugs were found >> very very late in the process. Basically 1 week after the TEST file >> went up. >> >> pkg_add turns out to have a major bug which would have been spotted if >> just a few other people had tested another line item in the TESTS >> file. >> >> That is ridiculous. >> >> I cannot accept all this pressure being on me; I want recognition that >> all the people who thus far have accused me for not being clear are >> wrong. >> we have developers in the group who cannot by themselves recognize -- >> even ANTICIPATE -- that we are going into the same 6-month release >> cycle, EVERY feb/march, and EVERY august/sept, and then participate to >> identify the 10 last stupid bugs that we should fix. Is there that >> little desire to ship a good release? >> >> It will not be fixed by sending more mails out. I did send out mails >> and they were ignored. Communication coming from me is not the >> problem; it is clear that developers are NOT LISTENING. >> >> The problem is not new developers either. Anyone accusing them has >> got it all wrong. New developers are supposed to learn the ropes from >> old developers, and it is the old developers who are not doing their >> part. Yes, that means you. >> >> 31 people tested, meaning 140 people did not. Any suggestions for >> people who have idled out and don't want to be involved any more? >> >> When we ship a crap release, it is not my fault. It is YOUR fault. >> >> So tell me how we are going to fix this. Don't reply just to me. >> >> As I said, I will not accept responsibility for what went wrong here. >> And if anyone wants their account disabled, please accuse me just once >> more. > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > > And he picks on a few individuals: > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > >> To: hack...@cvs.openbsd.org >> Subject: Testing >> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:39:12 -0600 >> From: Theo de Raadt <dera...@cvs.openbsd.org> >> >> I would like to see some tests for the upcoming release from Henning. >> >> I hope this communication is clear enough. > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > >> To: henn...@cvs.openbsd.org >> cc: hack...@cvs.openbsd.org >> Subject: Apology >> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 09:44:45 -0600 >> From: Theo de Raadt <dera...@cvs.openbsd.org> >> >> I find myself unable to take back-talk from people discussing testing >> and then accusing me of having not done my job asking for testing, >> when they did not do their job. You did zero tests (everyone can >> check ~jsing/TESTS) over the 3 week period, yet you feel you can >> lecture me on why the testing procedure failed. >> >> I will enable your account when you find the time to apologize for >> your statements. >> >> I hope this mail is clear enough. > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > > And now he comes up with this brilliant gem: > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > >> To: hack...@cvs.openbsd.org >> Subject: Testing idea >> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 10:16:01 -0600 >> From: Theo de Raadt <dera...@cvs.openbsd.org> >> >> How is this for a testing idea: >> >> - if you are part of the release build process (ie. building binaries >> for the release), all is good >> >> - if you work hard on finding and fixing a bug found during the >> release / testing process, all is good. >> >> - if your name is in the TESTS file, all is good >> >> - if you send me a mail describing circumstances that led you to not >> be able to test, all is good >> >> Otherwise, on the day the CDRs go to the plant your account will be > disabled >> 'due to inactivitity'. >> >> Is that where we should go? > > ----- snip ---- snip ---- > > Yes Theo, let's just go that road and you'll find yourself again in a same > spot as 8 years ago: wondering why everybody started bailing out on you. > > Not all of us accept not that you are doing the right thing, so we'll find > another sand box to play in. > > Enough of the bullshit... when is this project grow up and be run by a team > that is accountable (voted for?) and not a guy sitting in his livingroom in > his underwear ranting on ICB? > > H.
