[Python-Dev] Distutils ML wrap-up: setup.cfg new format

P.J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Thu Sep 24 03:57:14 CEST 2009

At 12:40 AM 9/24/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>Come on phillip, no one is "plotting" against you.

Perhaps this is a language issue.  When I said, "if Tarek is too busy 
projecting hidden plots onto everything I say and do," I meant that 
you were acting as if I were plotting against *you*, not the other 
way around.  (For example, you described one of my proposals as 
"suspicious", in a context that made it appear you were concerned it 
would undermine your plans for Distribute.)

However, I find it "suspicious" myself, that, rather than actually 
address *any* of the substantial issues I brought up, you chose to 
re-argue points I'm not even disputing.

For example, is it really necessary to make *every* post of yours 
that mentions me include an essay on how long it's been since the 
last setuptools release?  As I said below, I don't see how that's 
remotely relevant to the value of my contributions...  but somehow 
you find a way to bring it up constantly.

Do you feel so guilty about forking that you need to continually 
re-justify yourself?  If you're doing it on my account, do please 
stop.  AFAIR, I haven't said a negative thing about your fork since 
it got off the ground, and have in fact said many positive things 
about it.  Indeed, the only negative thing I would currently say 
about it, is that your characterization of it as a "friendly" fork is 
not consistent with your public behavior and demeanor towards me.

Once again, I'd like for the badgering to stop.  Thanks.

At 12:40 AM 9/24/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>You didn't maintain setuptools for a year while people where begging 
>you to do bug fixes. You blessed Ian and Jim to take over but they 
>are too busy to do it . I even sent them a mail on my side to try to 
>convince them.
>So we asked you to bless someone else that was active (not in 
>particular me as your mail seem to say) but you did not. So we 
>forked. And people were pissed off at you. (Which I am sorry about)
>If a project is not maintained and if the maintainer does not open 
>it to other maintainers, that s the way to go .
>And the fact that I took the lead of that fork doesn't mean I am 
>offended because you did not bless me to maintain setuptools. It 
>just means that I want to move forward and have a working tool for python 3.
>So let me make it clear that when you say "Tarek appears" it is 
>something I have never said but rather something you are thinking 
>like being the truth.
>Now for the Distribute work , your patches are very welcome. It s a 
>community project.
>>On Sep 23, 2009 10:47 PM, "P.J. Eby" 
>><<mailto:pje at telecommunity.com>pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
>>At 07:00 PM 9/23/2009 +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote: > > While it's 
>>great to have Philipp being part of o...
>>Here's what actually happened, if anyone cares.  Tarek and friends 
>>announced a fork of setuptools.  I reviewed the work and saw that 
>>-- for the most part -- I was happy with it, and opined as how I 
>>might be willing to bless the the "package inquisition" team as 
>>official maintainers of the 0.6 branch of setuptools, so that I 
>>could work on the fun bits I've long planned for 0.7, but never 
>>felt free to start on while there was so much still needing to be done on 0.6.
>>However, just as I mentioned this, and suggested an option for what 
>>I could do that would be helpful to his Distribute 0.7 project as 
>>well as various other tools (e.g. implementing some of Jim Fulton's 
>>long-requested features for better modularization of setuptools), 
>>Tarek accused me of somehow trying to undermine his plans.
>>In addition, it appears Tarek was also offended by my earlier 
>>statement that there were only a few people in the Python community 
>>who had *already* earned my implicit trust to not only hack on 
>>setuptools unsupervised, but also to take over its *future* 
>>direction and BDFL-ship.  (For example, Jim Fulton and Ian Bicking.)
>>Tarek, however, appears to have taken this to mean that I 
>>personally thought he was an incompetent programmer or something 
>>(when I actually had no opinion one way or the other), and ever 
>>since he has taken to levelling potshots like the above at me on a 
>>semi-regular basis.
>>I've tried to ignore this and play nice, because he is actually 
>>working on this stuff and I am not.  But it's hard for me to 
>>actually give any help in practice, if Tarek is too busy projecting 
>>hidden plots onto everything I say and do.
>>If you read Tarek's distutils-sig posts, it appears my 
>>already-existing trust in Ian and Jim was not only a personal 
>>insult to Tarek, but also a plot to ensure that nobody with any 
>>time to do so would ever work on setuptools, just as my excitement 
>>about working on setuptools again was a plot to steal thunder from his fork.
>>All I want is for good stuff to happen for setuptools users and 
>>Python users in general, so I don't think all the suspicion and 
>>backbiting is merited.  I certainly don't appreciate it, and I 
>>would like it to stop.  It also isn't even relevant to the thread, 
>>since my lack of work on setuptools says exactly zero about the 
>>merits or lack thereof of Tarek's proposals for the distutils!
>>Hell, I *support* the bulk of Tarek's setup.cfg proposal, and don't 
>>even object to him Pronouncing it or cutting off the 
>>discussion!  My only issue on Python-Dev was his inaccurate 
>>implication that it was a SIG consensus rather than a pronouncement 
>>on it.  There is and was no need for any of this to get personal, 
>>and I have continually strived to keep my posts here and 
>>distutils-sig civil, even when I didn't feel like being civil in 
>>response to Tarek's jabs.  I have in fact bent over backwards to be 
>>*nice* to Tarek, because he seemed so damn sensitive about 
>>everything.  Apparently, however, this does not actually help things.  :-(

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list