cs at zip.com.au
Wed Sep 22 22:59:21 CEST 2010
Usual disclaimer: I am not a python-dev, just a lurker who sticks his 2c in
On 22Sep2010 07:17, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
| On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
| > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
| >> Simply, situations like the above (Mark closing a bug just because
| >> nobody would answer his message on a short delay) have happened
| >> multiple times - despite people opposing, obviously -, and we decided
| >> that it was better to remove his tracker privileges since his
| >> contribution has not really been productive for us.
Which sounds like a genuine problem, but ...
| >> There was a whole python-dev thread some time (weeks? months?) ago where
| I think it was the thread "No response to posts" started (by Mark) on July 31.
| >> several of us already tried to suggest more fruitful ways of
| >> contributing, suggestions which weren't received very welcomingly AFAIR.
| Yup. In that thread (and others) I see lots of evidence where Mark
| responded very negatively (from "I disagree entirely" to "I find this
| response quite pathetic") when people explained how we treat the
| tracker, and stuck to his guns no matter how many people tried to
| explain that he should stop.
| His attitude can be summarized by his "Fly back at me if you like. I
| don't care about me. I don't care about you. I do care about
| Which to me sounds defiant and passive-aggressive. I don't want to go
| into analyzing, but I expect that Mark has issues that are beyond what
| this community can deal with.
I've just read that thread. Mark doesn't sound that way to me. "I
disagree entirely" is an entirely valid response, when backed up with
argument, such as his immediately following sentence:
Perhaps we should simply agree to disagree, but I can't see how having
issues that have been sitting for years without any response at all ties in
with "the current set up works reasonably well"
"I find this response quite pathetic" does seem an overreaction to a
single point clarification-type post. The "Fly back at me if you like. I
don't care about me. I don't care about you. I do care about Python."
quote I actually think this quite laudable in its way; he's expressing a
commitment to getting things done, and a determination to focus on the
core issue (response workflow, from the sounds of it) in the face of the
emotional responses the disagreement will inevitably produce in the
discussions. Again, a follow on statement from that same post:
Further, issues don't have to be closed, but what has to happen is
that any issue that get raised *MUST* have a response.
That's a concrete objection to the status quo for certain old bugs, and one
that applies just as well to me own personal email practices (I have a
bunch of unreplied-to threads in my supposedly "priority" inbox; at
least these days a mark the things needing a real reply so i can find
them later even if I often don't get back to them).
I'm not disputing the decision to revoke his priviledges; if he really
was closing a lot of bugs that most devs don't think should be closed
and could not be dissuaded from doing so I can't see an alternative.
I'm just saying I think the tone if his responses in the thread cited
isn't as negative to my eye as people are making out.
Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> DoD#743
'Soup: This is the one that Kawasaki sent out pictures, that looks so beautiful.
Yanagawa: Yes, everybody says it's beautiful - but many problems!
'Soup: But you are not part of the design team, you're just a test rider.
Yanagawa: Yes. I just complain.
- _Akira Yanagawa Sounds Off_ @ www.amasuperbike.com
More information about the Python-Dev