"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
> Christopher Cain wrote:
> >
> > "Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
> >
> > > Where were you KIDS when we were fighting the big
> > > corporations to have them looking into open source, to contribute
> > > significant parts of their technologies to the Foundation, where were you
> > > while we were changing this world? You were home, and one day, you looked up
> > > on your browser, saw a thing called Jakarta and started weening if things
> > > weren't as nice as you wanted them.
> >
> > Nice. Now as a newcomer who wishes to give back to the community, do you think
> > that this makes me feel more welcome or less? Why don't you just post a big sign
> > that says, "If you were not here in the beginning, you are irrelevent. Go Away."
> > That would probably be a slightly more effective means of keeping new developers
> > away than simply making fun of them.
>
> That was not my intent, sometimes I just get too epic :) :) :)
> What I wanted to say is that when decisions are made, even if in an open
> source project, you have to stick with them. That's why new developers
> are "hinted" to read the list for a while before coming along and trying
> to revolution the whole thing.
Understood. I was simply trying to to give you a newcomers perspective of how some of
these posts are coming across (from all sides), which is pretty much my entire point
on this thread. And don't worry, you are deinitely not the only epic author in this
list :-)
> > I assume that I fall under that auspise since I also called Jon out directly. And
> > yes, as I stated in no uncertain terms, many times I do _not_ care about reading
> > what Jon writes. Many of his posts are so demeaning to whomever they addressed
> > that it is difficult to read them all the way through, quite literally. It makes
> > me uncomfortable to see well-meaning people treated like that. And trust me, I
> > received enough private mail on the subject to assure you that I am far from the
> > only one. The bottom line is, Jon is currently getting no more and no less than
> > he gives everyone else.
>
> And that's wrong... Why sending you email privately? Come on out, my old
> flameproof vest is on, and kids, you don't even know how much I can
> take.
> Get out, tell me I'm an ignorant idiot (Duncan, what was that? Arrogant
> Pig? I believe that's how you've been called somewhere else! :) :)
My private conversations are my own. They were mostly the musings of newcomers just
like myself, who have no desire to become involved in this extra-curricular stuff (and
understandably so). Which, again, speaks directly to my point: There are people who
want to help out but not in this kind of environment. Rather than calling on such
people to openly flame you in this list, further lowering the civility level, maybe
the better approach would be to try and raise it to a level that would make people
feel good about getting involved.
> All I ask you guys it to prove me wrong. Prove me that 3.3 is not a new
> servlet container, prove me that it's just bugfix and performance. Give
> me some damn facts.
>
> > > hear that people like Paul Frieden (the only person that did put some salt
> > > in what he said)
> >
> > Hey, thanks =)
> >
> > <technical arguments/replies snipped due to my position as a whining, snot-nosed
> > little kiddie who stumbled across Jakarta a mere six months ago and can therefore
> > not possibly have anything meaningful to say>
>
> Did I overlook one of your emails? Subject please, since you posted 6
> times on this mailing list and the first time in september. Were you
> around when 4.0 was voted on?
No, you didn't overlook anything. I was not around for the 4.0 vote, and wouldn't have
had an informed opinion at the time anyway. This was simply further pointing out how
your initial "Where were you KIDS..." comments made some of us feel.
> > > As one of the people behind the scenes since before each of you got here, I
> > > believe my vote counts, and now, please prove me wrong.
> >
> > This post is a better example of my original point than I could possibly dream
> > up, and it has nothing to do with the technical merits of the architecture. Sam
> > is right on the money. Do you think that this little scuttle over 3.x vs. 4.x
> > will be too terribly important six months from now? Probably not. What will be is
> > the one or two or ten developers who eventually decided to contribute their
> > limited time and resources to a different OSS project because this one is getting
> > too contentious for their tastes. There are other great projects out there to get
> > involved in, and whether or not a project has some fun people to work with, as
> > opposed to everyone treating each other like shit when they disagree, is
> > definitely a consideration for most of us.
>
> Go back, read the archives and take a look to what I said when we voted
> on tomcat 4.0. Then go again and read what I proposed Costin for his new
> servlet container.
I didn't mean to imply that you yourself have a history being rude, and I apologize if
that's how it came across. Your "epic" e-mail aside, in fact, you've pretty much stuck
to facts in your arguments. Just between you and me ... {glances around to make sure
nobody else is listening} ... I even agree with some of your arguments. =)
> Cute, now I'm the bad guy. I like this position...
Sorry, but Jon is still the bad guy (kidding).
> You still didn't proove me wrong.
Pier, other people are debating you on the technical merits of the argument, not me. I
have my opinions on it, but I have abstained from voicing them in favor of what I
consider to be the greater damage being done to the project: Namely, us new people
have a hard enough time trying to figure out how to contribute given the fuzzy state
of the code future without having to worry about getting flamed and disrespected. I
want Tomcat to be a success and to constantly have new people jumping in to help out,
so I am simply trying to implore everyone to please strip out all of the arrogance and
ill-will out of there posts before pressing that "Send" button. That, in a nutshell,
is my only point.
> --
> Pier Fumagalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier>
- Christopher
