Re: [Fwd: gnome-system-monitor 2.17.94]

[Kjartan Maraas <kmaraas broadpark no>]

ons, 28.02.2007 kl. 18.48 +0000, skrev Beno�Dejean:
> Le mercredi 28 f�ier 2007 �2:22 +0100, Kjartan Maraas a �it :
> > ons, 28.02.2007 kl. 10.07 +0100, skrev Beno�Dejean:
> 
> > > Mariano Su�z-Alvarez  <mariano gnome org> has commited, tagged and
> > > released a new version of system-monitor without my approval or any
> > > notice. I don't know anything about this man. I am so upset.
> > > 
> > I can understand this. The reason the tarball was made is that the docs
> > didn't build in the tarball you made with the omf file corrections. So
> > we figured that it was important to get a fixed tarball out since it had
> > been broken for a couple releases. I talked to Mariano about this and
> > told him to mail you since we just missed you on IRC when we found out
> > about the problem. 
> 
> > Sorry, we never meant to step on your toes.
> 
> How can you say that !?! If i wanted to drive a bus over somebody's
> toes, i would have done the same. You haven't forgot anything : the
> commit, the tag, the release and the bugzilla.
> 
I don't really understand what you're saying here. Sorry.

> >  The only
> > thing we wanted was to have a working tarball for your module in the
> > beta.
> 
> 
> Is Mariano part of the release-team ? No.
> Has the release-team dared to email me to explain why they authorize
> this ? No.
> Has Mariano even explained what was the problem ? No.
> 
> I am not stupid and 2.17.93 worked when i released it. When Matthias
> pinged me, i responded within a minute : we fixed the problem and i
> rolled a tarball.
> 
The tarball didn't build with the current version of gnome-doc-utils,
which is why we wanted a working tarball in the beta.

> About Mariano's changes : all i see is: 
> - a generated file removal
> - a POTFILES.skip update
> - a 3 line update to a XML file that is unrelated to the omf issue.
> 
> Yes, Mariano fixed a __warning__ "db2omf: Missing abstract element with
> role description". I don't see how this was critical. The problem was
> that omf files were not installed and it was fixed in 2.17.93. There was
> no need to do a release for a warning fix.
> 
This warning was made fatal a few g-d-u releases back which is exactly
what broke the build.

> > > And he has actually screwed SVN as you can see
> > > http://svn.gnome.org/viewcvs/gnome-system-monitor/
> > > 
> > Yeah, I've done this myself several times. The svn interface is still
> > not "in everyone's fingers". Want me to remove that dir or do you want
> > to handle it yourself?
> >  
> > > Please, remove the tarball as soon as possible from FTP and do what you
> > > have to do.
> > 
> > Isn't the tarball ok? What's the point in removing it if it's actually
> > working better than the previous one? There was no ill intent here,
> > quite on the contrary. If anyone is to blame it's me for encouraging
> > Mariano to release it.
> 
> Is Mariano the new system-monitor maintainer ? Because it seems that you
> granted him full-power over system-monitor svn, releases and bugzilla.
> So tell me.

I never did that and you're blowing this way out of proportions with
these accusations. We fixed a broken tarball and made it possible for
people to build your module. 
> Do whatever you want with the .94 tarball and svn, i disapprove that
> release.
> 
Then please release a new one that you approve of. You'll need the fix
for the docs in there anyway.

> > Also, Mariano has been a contributor to GNOME for years so I find it a
> > bit strange that you don't know anything about him.
> 
> And I'm just a noob ? I though that i had earned some respect and
> consideration. I was wrong.
> 
Did I say that? Did I not apologize in public for the confusion that
arose from this? I AM SORRY, but we only helped you fix a broken
tarball!

> There is one thing i've learnt from GNOME : team work. You know when
> people work together, get mutual approval, exchange emails to keep
> everyone informed. No you don't.
> 
> 
> Thanks for the backstab.

Yeah right.

Cheers
Kjartan