| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:27 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Tony0945 wrote: | | Mostly what I've heard has been Canadian French and Louisiana French which I suspect sounds strange (outre ?) to "real" French speakers. |
I don't know for Lousiana french, never heard some, but Canadian, plenty, it do sound funny, but nobody could beat the "ch'tis" that is beyond any understanding.
I'm not sure if you could yourself hear the difference, but at 1:05 the guy that is hurt by the car is ch'tis, you could then hear him speak, while the other guy is asking him if his jaw is broken. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
krinn ... you still seem to see it as "personal communication" (and so subject to the trust we expect from friends, etc). Had he said, "I'm under an incredible amount of stress lately", then yes, his personal trust/confidence may have been violated, but that isn't the case, he wasn't acting as a private individual, he was acting in the public role of a developer, and discussing gentoo "business".
Funny you mentioned facebook in this regard, because a comparison can be made to this situation ... just not the one you provided. When someone "leaked" the Bosworth "growth at all costs" memo, facebook employee's similarly saw it as a betrayal of "loyalty" (see: here). Facebook does care about privacy ... it's own ... they too see their interests harmed by people violating the right of "private communications" ;)
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | | krinn ... you still seem to see it as "personal communication" (and so subject to the trust we expect from friends, etc). Had he said, "I'm under an incredible amount of stress lately", then yes, his personal trust/confidence may have been violated, but that isn't the case, he wasn't acting as a private individual, he was acting in the public role of a developer, and discussing gentoo "business". |
For me, even if rocco Siffredi is sending a texto to his mom, it's private.
You could say the media itself may not be private, like using this forum software (that is public), but the "private" message part of the message board is private too.
an irc channel is also public, but in irc you can also /msg someone and this is privacy then, no rules or document even from Gentoo could void privacy for me, even if the document state that any private message about gentoo, from a gentoo dev is public.
The openness of Gentoo is not against the privacy, gentoo devs could privately discuss everything they wish for a problem, but the result of that discussion should be submit in an open discussion rather then doing a major change with some, hey we have discuss this plenty hours in private.
One example of such thin line between privacy and public, could be voting cast by ComRel : When voting, ComRel cast their vote thru email.
I'm totally ok if ComRel Lead is querying vote with a private (email in this case) made of "hey for voting to kick X ass, what is your vote? I hope you will vote yes!". It's not quiet nice, but it's private, if ComRel Lead is doing that, he is an ass, but ComRel members shouldn't still release that to public, they could still vote yes/no/whatever ignoring what Lead has said.
But while i fully protect the both email content (the one sent, and the reply), i'm totally against hidding both the name and vote result from ComRel members : it's a responsibility which cannot be hide behind secret in itself, but more, it's vital that voting cast must be kept public in order to prove fairness out of cheating or error.
Right now i only see ComRel publishing : vote 6, no answer 3.
| khayyam wrote: | | Funny you mentioned facebook in this regard, because a comparison can be made to this situation ... |
If facebook would test me for privacy issue, they would see i'm the white knight of privacy protection!
Just to see after that i have leak their informations : facebook is not a human, as such they have no privacy ; i agree you could expect discretion and loyalty from your employees to not hurt your company, but in no way you should mistake this as privacy.
So i do not recognize privacy of facebook, still, any message send/received from their employees is private, as such facebook has no right at all to read them, even if the message pass thru or is store in their server ; and this as long as such practice (reading employees email) is not clearly wrote and consent (if facebook wish do that, they could tell employees they will, and employees could do what it is need to protect their privacy, in this case, not using facebook server for email).
You (not you khayyam here, i mean every reader there) might in private tell your friends your company sucks, your boss is a fat ass bastard that piss you off... While you remains employee of the month each time.
Last edited by krinn on Sun Apr 22, 2018 3:45 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
krinn ...
you're conflating two entirely separate things, the private/public distinction, and the rights held by private individuals. If you're committing a crime, and communicate the fact to me, then your private right is not inviolate (as you are making me complicit, and my right not to be implicated trumps your right to "private communications"). Similarly, if you're acting as a public servant, or gentoo developer, or business, then these activities involve a public interest, and so whatever is done that can be said to pertain to that public is not protected in the same manner. A private individual peacefully, and lawfully, going about their private business is one thing, an agent of an organisation is another.
It should be clear from the above that mgorny wasn't acting as a private individual, and under what circumstances he would be (ie, discussing his health, or what-have-you), he was doing gentoo "business", and so if this serves the public interest (which I think it does, if only because of the "open" principle laid out in the charter) then I think there is no reason to frame drobbins as having violated mgorny's right to "private communications".
As for facebook, the point was to show how the wagon's circle when an NDA, or "loyalty", is violated, not to claim "privacy" ... they too are subject to public interest considerations.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | | If you're committing a crime, and communicate the fact to me, then your private right is not inviolate (as you are making me complicit, and my right not to be implicated trumps your right to "private communications"). |
Privacy is not secrecy ; first you won't be complicit of my crime because i have privately told you i did, it's only how you will handle it (else if i get a cop and report my crime to him, he is now complicit too).
So to not be complicit, you should report what i have told you (as a good citizen), and reporting it doesn't break my privacy. Still keep in mind that not reporting it doesn't also automatically make you a complicit, if in anyone eyes i was saying shit (you think you will go in jail if you don't report a private message i sent you with "yes, it was me who shot kennedy!"?)
Once you report my crime, you might need to provide proof, if you provide my privacy message telling you i did a crime, then this time, you are breaking my privacy
But that's it, even the most basic right could be remove from an individual in our society (like the freedom that should be highest right, still, we put man in jail no?), and i don't think anyone would care that much if i complain that you have broke my privacy to report my crime 
In real i think it's you that is missing the point there...
in bug#1 drobbins is facing "insult", because of asshole usage
in bug#2 drobbins is facing "intention to discredit someone", again, nothing about breaking privacy, this ban could be avoid, as it's arguable easy that the discredit (if any was made) is not the intention of drobbins, but a result of mgorny own words, that's my pornstar example earlier, is her intention to discredit that President? or more to make money? Everyone already is aware that he slept with her, so the discredit if any (told you already, for French, 0 discredit for that) is already there, what is she doing is trying to remove her clause for secrecy because her intention is then make lot of money with the story ; but nobody (even his wife) has really any need to read the book to blame him.
For drobbins, he has told his intention, opening eyes/telling truth, did drobbins create a fake message? Was that private message really wrote by mgorny? If so, then i disagree with bug#2, because it's up to mgorny to speak nicely about people even in private, nobody is forcing him to be an ass in private no?
edit: i could speak about "so-call" loyalty of employee for their company too if you wish, because loyalty is earn, never paid ; and as you see, i'm in chat mood this week |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | | If you're committing a crime, and communicate the fact to me, then your private right is not inviolate (as you are making me complicit, and my right not to be implicated trumps your right to "private communications"). |
| krinn wrote: | | Privacy is not secrecy ; first you won't be complicit of my crime because i have privately told you i did, it's only how you will handle it (else if i get a cop and report my crime to him, he is now complicit too). So to not be complicit, you should report what i have told you (as a good citizen), and reporting it doesn't break my privacy. |
krinn ... little of what you've written makes sense to me, you go from "you won't be complicit" to "so to not be complicit", with it all turning on whether not reporting is "a crime" is itself a crime. I didn't state what that complicity involves, and when I'm not explicit its probably for a reason. That complicity can refer to the ethical and not the legal realm. Also, I can't see how any of this explains "privacy is not secrecy", or how this ties into the argument I've made ... does the argument rely on this being the case?
| khayyam wrote: | | Still keep in mind that not reporting it doesn't also automatically make you a complicit [...] |
It does, particularly if the party making the confession expects that what is said in private remains private ... that was the whole point the analogy, and why I used the term "inviolate" WRT "private communications".
| krinn wrote: | | Once you report my crime, you might need to provide proof, if you provide my privacy message telling you i did a crime, then this time, you are breaking my privacy |
No, privacy is not a natural right, it's a positive right, and as such it comes burdened with the rights of others. That is why I've stated on a number of occasion that the right and wrong of such actions depend on what interest is being served.
| krinn wrote: | | But that's it, even the most basic right could be remove from an individual in our society (like the freedom that should be highest right, still, we put man in jail no?), and i don't think anyone would care that much if i complain that you have broke my privacy to report my crime :) |
In which case I'm inclined to think you're arguing in bad faith ... whether intentionally or not you're vacillating between rights as absolutes (violated under whatever circumstances) and "right could be remove[d]". It is not a violation of someone's right when punitive measures are taken against them, if an others right has been violated by their actions.
| krinn wrote: | In real i think it's you that is missing the point there...
in bug#1 drobbins is facing "insult", because of asshole usage
in bug#2 drobbins is facing "intention to discredit someone", again, nothing about breaking privacy, [...] |
No, I'm not ... look at the reason given for the ban: "Rationale: Deliberate public posting of private conversations with the intention to discredit", so everything to do with "breaking privacy".
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony0945
Watchman
Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 5127
Location: Illinois, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 19, 2018 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | nobody is forcing him to be an ass in private no? |
There is an old expression in America. "A leopard can't change his spots." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | | No, I'm not ... look at the reason given for the ban: "Rationale: Deliberate public posting of private conversations with the intention to discredit", so everything to do with "breaking privacy". |
Yep sorry, miss it, thanks for correcting me, agreeing with you it is ; still you don't agree about the privacy part (that message wasn't private for you) given in the reason, while i myself disagree with the intention (the intention wasn't to discredit for me) given in the reason.
But i'm only agreeing on that |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | | No, I'm not ... look at the reason given for the ban: "Rationale: Deliberate public posting of private conversations with the intention to discredit", so everything to do with "breaking privacy". |
| krinn wrote: | Yep sorry, miss it, thanks for correcting me, agreeing with you it is ; still you don't agree about the privacy part (that message wasn't private for you) given in the reason, while i myself disagree with the intention (the intention wasn't to discredit for me) given in the reason.
But i'm only agreeing on that :) |
krinn ... no problem. I guess my position is that for every case there are exceptions created by context (so, in what role the person is acting, what interest the release of that information serves, what makes it private/pubic, etc). In short, I don't believe we can apply an absolute standard for privacy, liberty, etc, etc, they are approximations that need to be viewed within the context in which they are applied.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Can I just point out how incredibly petty "intention to discredit" sounds as a reason to ban someone from anything? That's saying you're not even sorry or willing to refute that you got caught being abusive behind closed doors, instead you're just straight up offended at the idea you can be caught.
I see plenty of other examples of redshirts (including the supposed victim) doing exactly the same thing in bugzilla. If you don't want to get called out every other week for being a shitty person… maybe stop being one? Don't put on a façade of fake civility in public and then cower behind the letter of your made-up laws to act like this in secret. Go back to 4chan if you want to do that.
Required reading, because Gentoo's full of this and has been forever. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant P. wrote: | | Can I just point out how incredibly petty "intention to discredit" sounds as a reason to ban someone from anything? That's saying you're not even sorry or willing to refute that you got caught being abusive behind closed doors, instead you're just straight up offended at the idea you can be caught. |
Absolutely.
I cannot believe I am reading "intention to discredit" when it comes to any sort of computer-related discussion.
Any disagreement with a technical position, can be perceived as "intended to discredit" the position under critique. Welcome to reality.
And as we are seeing here, a vague made-up "crime" can and will be broadly interpreted, and thereby twisted to infer malice as a pretext for truly malicious actions.
| Quote: | | I see plenty of other examples of redshirts (including the supposed victim) doing exactly the same thing in bugzilla. If you don't want to get called out every other week for being a shitty person… maybe stop being one? Don't put on a façade of fake civility in public and then cower behind the letter of your made-up laws to act like this in secret. |
Absolutely.
Make up offence where no-one was even talking like that, and you can then go on and do whatever apparatchik moves you like, using the bureaucracy as cover, and your made-up offence as pretext to behave even more obnoxiously (via abuse of power.)
As you said: | Quote: | Go back to 4chan if you want to do that.
Required reading, because Gentoo's full of this and has been forever. |
Yup, total asswipes behaving like prissy madamoiselles to hide behind rules their buddies will enforce on their behalf, whenever they're picked up on being asshats.
That's organics^W people for ya ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bunder
Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5937
|
| Posted: Mon May 14, 2018 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | abuse of the whitelist (e.g. by attempting to whitelist .*@.* or other such attempts) is not appropriate and will result in disciplinary action. |
I would like to know what this "disciplinary action" entails.
_________________
| Neddyseagoon wrote: | | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
banned from #gentoo since sept 2017 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
proteusx
Guru
Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 340
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 3:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bunder wrote: |
I would like to know what this "disciplinary action" entails. |
Circumcision without anaesthesia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think mv is right: it's time to setup an exit strategy from Gentoo.
OFC, that really just means an overlay, in technical terms, so I am not talking about "forking Gentoo" (which we all do, on a routine basis, when we change the configuration, or add an ebuild to our local overlay, etc.)
(Sorry to disappoint all those kind folks who've wished me "out of Gentoo".) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bunder
Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5937
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2018 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
quitting is for quitters.
i may have been away from the community for some time (after i basically got forced out), but they can't stop us from using the distro. i'm not going anywhere.
_________________
| Neddyseagoon wrote: | | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
banned from #gentoo since sept 2017 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yamakuzure
Advocate
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 2297
Location: Adendorf, Germany
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2018 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bunder wrote: | quitting is for quitters.
i may have been away from the community for some time (after i basically got forced out), but they can't stop us from using the distro. i'm not going anywhere. |
The problem is, once I got used to the freedom Gentoo offers, no other distro cuts it any more. I could use a few others for work, but the amount of things I missed always piled up so quickly, it got extremely irritating in short time.
Hell, it is bad enough for me to install a Gentoo prefix in Cygwin. That should say enough...
_________________
Edited 220,176 times by Yamakuzure |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2018 8:38 am Post subject: ramble, ramble |
|
|
| bunder wrote: | | i may have been away from the community for some time (after i basically got forced out), |
Oh, sorry to hear that.
It can be quite a mangle if you've never been through it. | Quote: | | but they can't stop us from using the distro. i'm not going anywhere. |
Yeah, I used to have that attitude, and I still do to an extant. It's GPL, and all of it a community effort.
There's just so many bits going off at a tangent in the last 5 years, that reworking and maintaining a few toolchain ebuilds does not seem like such a big ask anymore.
Additionally there's a few people whose work I'd like to pull into a meta-overlay, and a couple of base packages I want to keep free of the systemdbust cancer (so it doesn't infect our machines.)
Plus I need a decent cross-development environment, and crossdev just ain't it (all the jokey comments as it repeatedly fails, just make me want to throttle the author for misapplied intellect); so I might as well work on that along with toolchain. (Actually, I'd rather pull binutils from mv, if possible, and just sort out gcc myself.)
Really, though what it comes down to is the borked approach that permeates Gentoo, from the mangler up; such that we never use standard setups like a chroot, even though we all install via one; nor can we even discuss libraries properly. Everything has to be forced into one scripting layer, and it's a mess, reliant on people who disdain the implementation language, as well as the users, and tend to go off on bizarre experiments which everyone else has to QA, til they get dropped a year or two later.
Complete waste of operator effort and downstream hours, that a few moments' thought upfront could have avoided. And ofc that's never welcome before the event: you just get labelled a "hater" for pointing out how stupid something sounds to a practitioner, and later on you're all told "you should have something before, it's open-source, you can patch it how you like," completely ignoring the point of a distro (whose developers are supposed to be more informed than the majority of the userbase, and are meant to sort out the technical base so we can do actual work.)
Social gaming as evinced in this episode just shows the depths of incompetence, afaic. It's what nubs reach for, when they have no basis.
Still, at least it keeps the users and their pesky knowledge, experience and reason out. That'll work. /s
Actually, I think it will work for what's intended: coopting Gentoo to make it into "RedHat experimental" (look, we even support a hobbled openrc!) that will never be allowed to compete directly.
And that's a shame, as it makes a great basis to build whatever you want, and it could show a different path, were it not continually hobbled as it has been for at least a decade.
What's changed is the feeling that the distro is on your side while you build what you want; now we end up spending half our time correcting basic mistakes, it seems. Ebuilds are no longer written to reflect upstream; they're written to enforce unwritten policy of "what's best" that changes depending on whom you're talking with, and what day of the week it is, but pretty much always ends up being developer overreach into areas that are not their concern (while everything that should be an option, no longer is.) Gone are the days when you're dealing with upstream direct, ime, and gone are the days when you had complete control and choice; the "Gentoo layer" ends up being as intrusive as a bindist, in terms of effort to get round it. (Or just don't update for a while, and reinstall for that true bindist feeling in days, not tens of minutes!)
But hey, let's tinker at the edges and rearrange the deckchairs, and then strut around full of ego-fulfillment about the badges we accumulate, and the users we put down on a routine, smarmy basis.
Now they all have to be pre-vetted before commenting on the mailing-list set up from the beginning as an avenue for developers to run things by the wider community, we should be able to turn the ml into a slightly more formal variant of the IRC channel, where we can show off our faculty at bizspeek, and pad our CVs by mutual admiration.
Once you're more concerned about your status than you are about the end-results, you are no longer a software developer. Chances are, you never were.
From what I've seen, Gentoo has more than its fair share of those types of people, who should never have been involved in software development at all (perhaps because it's so easy for "devs" to bring in outsiders, while freezing users out.) They simply do not have the right frame of mind to settle in and do the boring work; they keep having to follow wacky ideas instead, to make things more "interesting"; and they seem completely unable to do basic research before they implement.
The combination is deadly, as they are so susceptible to cargo-cult thinking, they trust it over basic research, which is alien to them apart from the nonsense they might learn at Uni, "summarizing the field", which just means reading webpages, mostly as full of crap as they are. Completely inept at social thinking, they are easy marks for people with more savoir faire.
Basic research into the problem domain is absolutely fundamental for any programmer; that the self-appointed "new generation" has no clue about it, simply indicates they are not the next generation of programmers and engineers at all.
All they are is the latest round of spivs looking to make a quick buck, by fast talking everyone in the room with bulshytt they heard from their friends.
And really, that's as old as computing; we're used to looking through "executives", and then ignoring them completely. ;-)
The next generation are quietly getting on with it, and having fun tinkering, with all the tools they could need.
They're spending nights wrestling with network packets, and learning to code across languages to get the results they want; they really do not have time for the apparatchik games.
We just need to make sure they still have a decent base to work from, when they get round to looking for work with their craft.
Which, like it or not (and I don't), means pushing back against the wannabe-execs when they steal our work, and lock us out of the discussion so the "big boys" can get on with carving-up. ("Be grateful for the crumbs, or you won't get any more of that bread you baked from grain you grew and harvested.")
If we don't, no-one else will, either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2018 9:12 am Post subject: Re: ramble, ramble |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | All they are is the latest round of spivs looking to make a quick buck, by fast talking everyone in the room with bulshytt they heard from their friends. |
... and pretty much describes how vast swathes of the industry functions ... and again here.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2018 5:06 pm Post subject: Re: ramble, ramble |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | All they are is the latest round of spivs looking to make a quick buck, by fast talking everyone in the room with bulshytt they heard from their friends. |
| khayyam wrote: | | ... and pretty much describes how vast swathes of the industry functions ... and again here. |
Damn, that guardian article is good.
Plus ca change.
Still, there's always a new sucker waiting to become a mark.
Distributions as associations of users, are supposed to protect us from rabid upstreams and corporations; not coopt us into doing all their work for them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
watersb
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Sep 2002
Posts: 297
Location: take a left turn in Tesuque
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NeddySeagoon wrote: |
when drobbins left...
The whole time, Gentoo has moved in the direction its been taken by those doing the work, not by any democratic process.
|
FWIW I have found mv's substantial development efforts to be crucial in porting 2018-Gentoo to old Mac PPC32.
You could argue that his /etc/portage/bashrc hooks result in something that changes the direction of Gentoo. It may change the semantics of the build system. I have tried moving my setup over to Funtoo to clarify my thinking on this but not there yet.
Iff "developer" == "direction" then mv is both of those things and should be able to argue about the direction changes. I would probably feel uncomfortable about mv becoming The Only Way To Do It but I don't want to argue that out here. I am but a user of the system that results in Gentoo + overlays. So I come here to ask questions and hopefully help others from time to time.
/etc/portage/... semantics should be discussed in gentoo-dev mailing list, and mv should have access to that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6780
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2018 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| watersb wrote: | | mv's substantial development efforts |
Although this flatters my ego, it is not true, and even less true concerning the small bashrc script which is nothing but a convenience wrapper for something which is available in portage anyway.
| Quote: | | /etc/portage/... semantics should be discussed in gentoo-dev mailing list |
No, /etc/portage is a pure portage thing. If at all it should be (and is) discussed on portage-dev mailing list.
| Quote: | | and mv should have access to that. |
My point is not that I will loose access; if I really wanted I could probably ask some developer to put me on the whitelist.
The point is as SteveL had mentioned: It had not been accidental (or even an incautiousness as somebody claimed here) that everybody could get write access to dev-ml, The idea had been that everybody can profit from comments of experienced users to discussed topics. Just think about e.g. the eclass changes or other RFCs; there are shell specialists (like e.g. steveL) which are not developers and which could (and in the past often did) give very valuable feedback on these things. In fact, this user base made Gentoo strong and what it is today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bunder
Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5937
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it would seem that the whitelist is now active.
if all goes as "planned", the list will wither and die.
but hopefully not before the war between council?+comrel and the foundation. 
and more shitstorms about censorship
fwiw, its been 9 months since I was muted in #gentoo with no end in sight.
also, while we're mentioning bgo, back in April, mgorny was touching hundreds of bugs dating back to 2005 for seemingly no reason... makes me wonder why anyone else would get banned from bgo.
_________________
| Neddyseagoon wrote: | | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
banned from #gentoo since sept 2017 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 9288
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Discussion yes, war not... less hyperbole please.
That's not a shitstorm, that's jer...
| bunder wrote: | | fwiw, its been 9 months since I was muted in #gentoo with no end in sight. |
I've heard that can happen pretty fast in that channel, but not sure what this has to do with any of this thread. It is a pure support channel... and with that, feel free to head over to https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Ops#Abuse_Management
| bunder wrote: | | also, while we're mentioning bgo, back in April, mgorny was touching hundreds of bugs dating back to 2005 for seemingly no reason... makes me wonder why anyone else would get banned from bgo. |
Without citation, that may have been simply bugzilla maint...
Last edited by asturm on Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:23 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobbymcgee
n00b
Joined: 12 Apr 2018
Posts: 55
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would not feel bad, #gentoo is a joke. Eventually all of the people grasping for power will realize they are the king of nothing and it is only themselves patting each other on the back surrounded by an empty room (and some noobs that don't know better yet). This forum is the last bastion of the Gentoo we all know and love. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2018 11:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
The ideal end result here is the Gentoo community slowly adopting an Exherbo-style distro model where everyone maintains a few ebuilds in their repo, and a few others run services that bring them all together. Maybe we can get a better solution going on top of ActivityPub...
The legacy gatekeeping position of Gentoo Developer then goes away, and all the needless problems and drama that it brings along with it disappear too. There'll be no more incidents along the lines of “I'm too obstinate to fix bugs in this one library, so I'm going to sabotage ${x}-thousand ebuilds to make sure nobody else can use it”. It won't be an immediate change of course, I expect they'll either decay into an XFree86-like state of hubris or (more alarmingly) a libav one - but then again, we've already had all kinds of problems with hostile patches being applied to our glibc with no oversight, so arguably we're already there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
