[aur-general] TU Application - Konstantin Gizdov

Fri Oct 26 17:46:53 UTC 2018

On 26/10/2018 17:49, Eli Schwartz via aur-general wrote:
> On 10/26/18 12:29 PM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
>> On 26/10/2018 15:27, Doug Newgard via aur-general wrote:
>>> I must point out this very recent mailing list thread:
>>> https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/2018-September/034279.html
>>>
>>> In this thread, you:
>>>
>>> 1) whine about someone taking over *your* packages, because you're the one that
>>> knows them and has cared for them and, after all, they're YOURS.
>> I did no such thing. I opened the thread by thanking Felix for picking
>> them up and asked a few questions about the plans for the packages and
>> how to pass on what I know, because I was having trouble doing that over
>> the bug tracker. What ensued after (the responses) was not my doing. I
>> tried to respond to every and all comments respectfully and I think you
>> will find a through discussion was had and a lot of details were sorted.
> s/respectfully/passive-aggressively/
>
> By "details sorted" do you mean, we told you to stfu and stop snidely
> implying oppression?
>
>> Part of that was revealing that the ROOT stack was being picked up -
>> yes, I care about it as it directly affects my profession and I've given
>> thorough reasons why. I **never claimed the packages were mine** - if
>> you talk about the usage of the word 'my', it clearly refers to me being
>> the maintainer. I said I've put work into them, continue to do so and
>> wanted to make sure I can pass that on in full. My TU application is me
>> trying to do that.
> Thereby implying you're unsure whether we're fit to maintain it, and you
> wish to pass your personal judgment, as though we needed your approval
> in order to function as a distribution.
>
> I assure you you're not the only person who has ever put work into an
> AUR package and then seen it be moved to community. Most of those people
> are cheerfully happy to see it moved, and their instinctive reaction is
> *not* "gosh, I wonder if they really know enough to package this
> according to my exacting standards".
>
>>> 2) whine about how things were handled on the bug tracker, thinking that this
>>> whining is how things get done. It's not.
>> Again, I did no such thing. I explained what happened and asked how can
>> I do better. I was told I have to stick to the bug tracker. Thus, I said
>> why I think this approach is failing in that particular case and gave
>> exampes.
>>
>> By the way, it was only because of that email that one of the bugs was
>> reopened (by Eli) and fixed, otherwise it was ignored. Seems to me my
>> email worked fine.
> Thanks for lying about me. In case I had any doubt what to vote, I've
> definitely made up my mind now and I'm voting against you.
>
> Just in case I was not somehow clear in the past:
>
> YOU FILED A REQUEST TO HAVE THE BUG RE-OPENED. THAT REQUEST WAS
> EVALUATED ON ITS OWN MERIT.
>
> Spamming the mailing list with whiny complaints does not help. Scimmia
> and I get notifications about all re-open requests, and we have a
> special admin interface to view all such pending requests. These get
> evaluated on merit.
>
> We will get to them when we get to them. There is no conspiracy to
> ignore you until you complain on the mailing list like a whiny baby.
>
> I hereby swear to you, and will happily have it notarized if it makes
> you any happier, that I completely ignored your thread when reading your
> mailing list spam.
>
> I will acknowledge that due to noticing your mailing list spam, I took a
> look at your re-open request.
> A grand total of maybe two hours before I would have looked at it *ANYWAY*.
>
> I don't appreciate having to justify myself over inanities like this
> conversation, and respectfully ask you to cease and desist on your
> repeated lies about me.
>
>>> 3) Tell bald faced lies about how things transpired on the bug tracker.
>> I'm sorry, but this is ridiculous. In the many emails I wrote that
>> evening, I got confused about one bug being closed, where it wasn't. You
>> tried to call me out for lying and my whole point being wrong, but later
>> **you yourself sent a follow up email to correct your own statement**. I
>> acknowledged my mistake on the spot. Surely, we can agree all of us make
>> mistakes. **In no way or form was I telling bald faced lies.**
>>> You really think this makes you TU material? Really?
>> Yes, I think the way I have handled the situation makes me trustworthy.
>> I care for the packages I maintain and the community enough to make sure
>> the packages are left in excellent shape and hands so people can depend
>> on them. I also have serious respect for the people here, community &
>> TUs - as I've said before, ArchLinux has been good to me I want to good
>> to it. This is why I made the fuss, because I care, but I also took
>> everyone's perspective in and kept a working discussion.
> I read this differently, you care so much that you don't trust anyone
> else to do it right. You're a control freak, and I don't want to have to
> deal with you on the team, no matter how capable you are as a programmer.
>
> Other TUs can make their own decisions of course.
>
You call me "passive aggressive" and a "whiny baby"... Everything I say
must be with some hidden malicious intent, right?

You have to defend yourself and I don't??

I'm sorry Eli, but I have told no lies about you. I and everyone here
has emails with dates and hours showing a sequence of events - I sent my
initial email at 9pm, you re-opening the bug at 3am UK. Everyone can
check that.

This is the last email I sent to you about this - thread is public anyway.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/aur-general/attachments/20181026/6e538ffe/attachment.asc>