|
Emmanuel....Your an ass (as in donkey).... But don't be offended by my tone, I only say this because I care about what happens the the OS X version of GTK. John has been working his tail off, all the while responding to dump developers like me, while I can't get a tweet out of an elites like you. I'm sick of your crap man! I was one of the people on this list who pushed to get John what little rights he does have, and like one post said, if you ACTUALLY cared, you would be making good positive suggestions, not ripping into the ONE person who actually has taken a vested interest in fulfilling, what the website touts as already there. When I first started down this path, the website claimed OS X, but when I got working everything was in taters, and if it had not been for John's tireless efforts, your claim on the website that the product works on OS X would be an outright lie! When I finally downloaded the source, it was full of NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED all over it, and if I had a smidgen of skill I would be helping John. So take a cold shower, and if you have any decency you would issue John a formal apology on this list. But I doubt you will. > Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 08:25:24 +0100 > From: ebassi gmail com > To: paul linuxaudiosystems com > Subject: Re: GTK and OSX: a call to sanity > CC: gtk-devel-list gnome org > > hi Paul; > > On 2011-09-06 at 18:18, Paul Davis wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi gmail com> wrote: > > > > > otherwise you're just forking gtk, and using the resources of the gtk > > > project to give an aura of officiality to what is essentially your own > > > personal project. > > > > I'd politely request that you stop using this tone in connection with > > this issue. > > I am a gtk contributor and I want to start helping with the OSX backend > because I got a new MBP and I'm working on gtk and clutter and I want > them both to work on my brand new machine. > > the first thing I noticed when I wanted to build my applications was > that I had to go on a website that has nothing to do with gtk.org, > download a jhbuild moduleset from a location that is not on gnome.org, > follow a mailing list that is not on gnome.org and file bugs on a bug > tracking system that is not on gnome.org > > now, tell me: what does it look like to you? > > to me, and not just to me, it looks like a fork. > > John says it isn't, and I believe him; so I want to fix the situation > where it looks like one. > > I read bugzilla emails for gtk (I know: shocker) and people file bugs > against the moduleset and the build on bugzilla.gnome.org; John has to > direct them to a separate bugzilla and to a separate mailing list. I > want to fix this. > > Windows and Linux build issues and support are handled on gnome.org: the > Quartz backend of gtk is not in any regard special and it should not > need separate resources. > > > There has always been a level of antagonism between developers working > > on GTK for OS X and the core development team. It rises and falls, and > > at present, things are generally in remarkably good shape, where most > > of what is required to get a fully functional GTK for OS X is right > > there in the tarball releases. > > and if you try to actually contribute, that's where the bubble bursts. > > > But when you start ripping into one of the only people willing to > > actually step up and take any responsibility for the issues faced by > > those of us that actually want to use GTK+ as a cross-platform > > development toolkit where the platforms include OS X, its remarkably > > scary. Other people have walked away from the effort because of the > > perception of "the core GTK guys just don't give a shit", and it > > doesn't help in any way that you take such an argumentative tone with > > john. > > that's the problem: I *am* a core gtk guy, and I *give* a shit. Mitch is > a core gtk guy and he gives a shit. Kris is a core gtk guy and he gives > a shit. you already have three. > > aside from the backend development and the toolkit development, what I > give a shit about is also the marketing of said toolkit; from a > marketing perspective, this whole divide is terrible and it has to be > rectified. we're already getting pummeled by people thinking that other > toolkits with better marketing are superior — let's not give them other > ammunition. > > I also give a shit about the "use vs. them" attitude: if the gtk-osx > project is handled like its own thing, in its own ghetto, then it won't > make it any easier to get traction inside the team. attending IRC team > meetings, discussing new features directly during the design phase, > coming to hackfests and to GUADEC: that's what maintainers do. > > > So please could you tone it down a bit, and rather than excoriate John > > for whatever you perceive his mistakes or whatever to be, focus on > > helpful suggestions. > > I apologize for the tone: I am *very* frustrated by this situation. > > now, I suggested how to improve the situation in the email as well. I > talk as both a member of the gtk team and as a Director of the Gnome > Foundation's Board: if services aren't moved as fast as they should, I > can help facilitate that. > > ciao, > Emmanuele. > > -- > W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name > B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi > _______________________________________________ > gtk-devel-list mailing list > gtk-devel-list gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list |