Re: newer and improveder new and improved oaf-slay

[James Morton <gengis hawaii rr com>]

This is surely none of my business.  Why I feel the need to reply is
beyond me.  It comes with the CC to a public mailing list though, I
suppose.

Open Source projects-Indeed, all projects-have historically been
maintained by multiple persons.  It can be described by no other term
accept 'common practice.'  To wit, I see at least 40 GNOME projects with
persons maintaining subsections of the code.

Whether or not you considered Michael to be the maintainer of the test
code, he clearly thought he was.  Perhaps rightfully so, as his name was
written next to 'Test Code' in MAINTAINERS.  A Maintainer of a project
can surely delegate responsibility - So how can it be possible that the
maintainer of a subset of code cannot approve a commit?  You reference
oaf/HACKING - But it must be pointed out that nothing is said of this
issue there.  HACKING speaks only to -areas- of privilege.  

It is of no question that the maintainer of a project has the ultimate
say in what is commited and what is not.  However, the circumstances of
this particular instance are such that it is -silly- to make an issue of
it.

>From reading the context left in the email you sent to gnome-components,
it seems that you, Maciej, are the one lacking maturity, spouting the
"nonsensical blather," and "melodramatic gestures."

I would just like you to please say the following to statements allowed,
and make an unbiased judgement:

"Smile, and remove me from MAINTAINERS if you would,"

"You are welcome to take your ball and go home if you think that's the
best option. :-)"

Let me once again apologize for butting my nose in where it does not belong.

 - James Morton

On 14 May 2001 14:47:41 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Michael Meeks <michael ximian com> writes:
> 
> > On 13 May 2001, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > > Perhaps you missed the section header above that says "Local Commit
> > > Priveleges" and the explanation of the whole deal in the HACKING file.
> > 
> >         I just read HACKING, I'm still confused :-) but wait - I want HACK
> > some priviledges !?!?? I know I get hacked first, but can you teach me get
> > scriptz ???!  ;-)
> > 
> > > You are welcome to take your ball and go home if you think that's the
> > > best option. :-)
> > 
> >         Good plan, I don't understand what it's all about, and I prefer
> > being at home :-)
> > 
> > > >     Smile, and remove me from MAINTAINERS if you would,
> > >
> > > I don't mind you committing to the test code without asking, I'd just
> > > prefer you not instruct others to commit their own changes.
> > 
> >         This seems totaly nonsensical to me. Do you trust my judgement or
> > not ? either way - please remove me from MAINTAINERS, I'd do it myself   
> > but ...
> > 
> 
> Hi Michael,
> 
> I have removed you as requested. Nevertheless I hold on to a slim
> hope that someday you will learn to be a mature adult.
> 
> For future referece, the correct response to a maintainer asking you,
> "Please don't approve other people's commits to my module," is "Sorry,
> it won't happen again," not nonsensical blather or melodramatic
> gestures.
> 
>  - Maciej
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnome-components-list mailing list
> gnome-components-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-components-list