From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23944 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2008 22:22:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 23935 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Feb 2008 22:21:59 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vms044pub.verizon.net (HELO vms044pub.verizon.net) (206.46.252.44) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:21:39 +0000 Received: from black ([96.238.9.21]) by vms044.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JWN00LC8VFO5O83@vms044.mailsrvcs.net> for gdb@sourceware.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:21:27 -0600 (CST) Received: from bob by black with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1JSgGi-0000QO-3s for gdb@sourceware.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:21:24 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 22:23:00 -0000 From: Bob Rossi Subject: Re: New MI maintainer In-reply-to: <20080222220927.GA21434@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> To: gdb@sourceware.org Message-id: <20080222222124.GH26716@brasko.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-disposition: inline References: <18363.14758.855327.355215@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <20080220190512.4550A8FC6D@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18364.37907.135913.269853@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <18366.14530.875406.113087@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> <47BF0478.1050209@ix.netcom.com> <20080222220927.GA21434@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg00196.txt.bz2 On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 05:09:27PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:22:41PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >Sorry, but that's pure demagoguery. "Open Source" and "Free Software" > >mean that the sources are available. They don't mean that every aspect > >of human life is open to the public. Even the most open democracies > >always have closed deliberations about certain issues. You cannot lead > >a group in any significant human endeavor without a certain distance > >between the leadership and the rest, and without closed deliberations > >about some sensitive issues. > > Amen. > > It's interesting how often people try to tack on bigger concerns to the > simple concept of Free Software. Free Software isn't supposed to be > solving global warming and it isn't supposed to be a demonstration of a > New World Order with feel-good cum ba yah. It's just a guarantee that > you get the source code for the software that you're using. > > Managing any project where people are involved means that sometimes the > people in charge have to have frank, private conversations. The > alternative, as Stan Shebs, notes is to essentially do performance > reviews in the open. > > Some projects *do* work that way but they are hardly bastions of > civilized discourse. This rhetoric annoys me. I was bringing up a sincere concern that I have. I suggested a more open model because I've been wondering for well over 5 years why it (used to?) takes 6 months to get a code review. Because the time to get a review was so long, I stopped bothering to submit patches. I remember that I planned my rehersal dinner for my wedding faster than I could get a code review, and thought that was wierd. I hope things are better now that Vladimar has taken his position. If so, I'll be joining you singing, cum ba yah. Bob Rossi