[haiku-development] Re: Banning Barrett
- From: Kacper Kasper <kacperkasper@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 19:10:44 +0100
sob., 16 mar 2019 o 16:00 Dario Casalinuovo <b.vitruvio@xxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
Now let's take a few other examples. PulkoMandy develops Web+, the rule is
that normally apps are kept in tree. I certainly trust him, but I'd like to
know more about Web+. Unfortunately there is no history in haiku-commits,
there may be another ML, I don't know, but I've been subscribed to so many
MLs that I hardly want to add more. And anyway, as said it's a core Haiku app
should not live separately.
The question is, since Adrien seems to like a lot gerrit and code reviews,
why don't him use gerrit for that? And why he doesn't push to actually have
webkit commits routed to haiku-commits for proper review? I'm pretty sure
it'd be an excessively annoying thing for him as it's already a difficult
area to develop without people questioning.
So, we are all good at predicating things that we don't follow in the first
place. Adrien is good without reviews, we don't have any idea of what he is
doing, and he rarely explains us what are his plans. Now, again, this is not
a critic to him, but do you see the parallel?
Suppose that if I'm forced to go through gerrit, also Adrien should be too,
what happens? Let's see if there is justice and equity in this community.
Nonetheless I have to say that someone finally acknowledged that it's really
painful to use the gerrit review for the kind of work I'm doing.
First, you are confusing things. Web+ changes go through Gerrit,
WebKit is hosted on GitHub. I can only assume the reason is that
WebKit repository is huge and it's easier that way.
Second, that you do not care is not a fault on Adrien's part. Whenever
I wanted to do something around WebKit, I got help from him. Pull
Requests were reviewed and merged, and you can comment on any commit
he makes. You just didn't bother like anyone else, and Adrien already
said a few times in this thread that he would like to get reviews.
Also, people please stop saying that I bypass reviews, until a year ago or
so, reviews where done only in the mailing list, and that's where those are
supposed to happen.
Yes, but that has changed, we have Gerrit now so we can do reviews
before code is merged, not after. I always use it for code I write,
and I can only ask for it to not be merged too quickly, because I go
through Gerrit to get it reviewed, not fast-tracked to the repo. The
latter I can do myself.
---
Now to the main topic - I also think the ban was premature. 33 hours -
a week long trip without access to the internet would make someone
miss the vote.
As for the ban itself, Barrett, it worries me that you still don't see
how your language is incendiary.
Stippi said a part of your change was "obviously wrong" because in one
line there was a trace saying something has failed and on the next one
B_OK was returned. If that is not wrong, I don't know what is.
You, on the other hand, use questions, for which underlying message is
"you are an idiot". It was explained already, so I won't go further
into this.
A tip from me would be: limit your words to absolute minimum that is
needed to convey your concerns (especially adjectives should be
watched out for), and use statements.
That's what I do, because sometimes messages I want to write sound
like yours in my head. That doesn't mean I need to upset others by
typing them out.
I honestly don't know how should I vote. At the beginning I wanted to
vote -1, taking the above into account it would be +1. But in the end,
humdinger brings up a good point that it's not only Barrett that is
using such language.
I would give him another chance.
- Kacper
Other related posts:
