Re: [Gnu-arch-users] No release forthcoming

[James Blackwell]

I mistyped one of the email addresses. Sorry for the double send.


These are both posts I'd like to respond to, so I'll take them together as
one, since Robert was kind enough to quote the other one. :) 


> On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 10:18 -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> > I'm really disappointed that things have gone this way.  I would have
> > liked it if Tom and James could get along this way, and work together.
> > To have 1.2.2 come to a screeching halt when it's almost ready to
> > release is frustrating.

I feel your pain. I'm just as frustrated as you are. I know you have a lot
invested in that work (btw, your work is still there). But take my word
for it; its cost me even more. What I've done in the last two months is
despite some huge events in my personal life; new job, two weeks in a new
country, first loosing my wife, then custody of my daughter. I walked the
Tom tightrope. Heck, I've even dealt with getting underpaid. 

Yeah, its very frustrating to me to.

> > Tom's right to take some time off.  Arch may be emotionless software,
> > but the Arch Project is people, and I think we all could use some time
> > to cool down and re-think things.
> > 
> > This is the part where I'd like to thank James for all his work on
> > 1.2.2, but I can't, because my lying circuits are all out of commission
> > James, if you'd said, "I'm done." that's what I'd be saying here.
> > That's what I'd like to be saying.  But when you ask us to destroy any
> > copies of your work, you're asking us to destroy the product of all of
> > our work, not just yours.  I can't thank you for wasting my time and
> > everyone else's.  And no, I don't intend to destroy my mirrors of your
> > archives.  They represent a collective effort that's bigger than you,
> > including testing, coding, updating old patches...

I understand. I don't expect you to thank me for this. 

> > Tom, stop calling people names, even if you think they really deserve
> > it.  A leader is supposed to be above that sort of thing.  It's
> > unseemly, and it lends a bad spirit to the community.
> 
> 
> To all of the above.. thank you for expressing it so well.
> 
> I've really valued your release-management work, and I'm sad to see you
> react to what (IMO) was Tom drawing a clear line (which he has drawn a
> few times over the last month) about where release mgmt ends and
> release-to-fsf-servers begins by 'packing up your toys'. You've done a
> tonne of work that absolutely needs to be done, that Tom has shown no
> inclination to do (whether as a social experiment to get us to do it, or
> as a social experiment to see whether we will think he is running a
> social experiment, or because he is currently scratching a different
> itch)... and Tom has supported your doing this work, and came back from
> the dead to 'ok' the jb-releases you put together.

I've been clear as well; my intent from the very beginning was to, through
sheer force of will, force the release process to happen; with or without
Tom.

> In fact, you had agreed with Tom for the release process for 1.2.2, and
> AFAICT thats exactly what was happening.

While the process I referred to a couple days ago was the exact same one
that's been in place since the beginning. Sometimes, Tom agreed with it;
sometimes he didn't. Regardless of his opinion of the moment, I pushed
past him. 

However, the message I've heard from the community over the last few days
is for me to not push though him, and he should make the releases. 

Thats fine with me. I can live with that. But if Tom is going to make the
releases, then he has to be the one to make the releases. That involves a
lot of work; reviewing merges, coordinating development updating the web
sites, supporting the users.

The idea that somebody would sit there for six hours a day, six days a
week for a month just so that somebody could step in at the last minute
and start mucking with it and _eventualy_ release something that may or
may not bear any relationship to the original work.....  well the
community will have to find somebody else to to that.


> The only thing I can see that explains this whole thread was Tom doing a
> very good RMS impersonation with respect to terminology.
> 
> Yours puzzledly,


-- 
James Blackwell          Try something fun: For the next 24 hours, give
Smile more!              each person you meet a compliment!

GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400