From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Contributors and maintainers Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:07:12 +0300 Message-ID: <83r3koe2nj.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87si59wj42.fsf@T420.taylan> <878u6znii9.fsf@T420.taylan> <877fmjj9p6.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87zizfm2dq.fsf@T420.taylan> <871tcr7yvq.fsf@fastmail.com> <87mvvfm0bd.fsf@T420.taylan> <56250803.5080601@cs.ucla.edu> <87a8ren5ys.fsf@T420.taylan> <56259BB1.3070908@cs.ucla.edu> <878u6ykmvt.fsf@T420.taylan> <87h9llvo98.fsf@members.fsf.org> <5626622A.3090707@yandex.ru> <87zizdijbp.fsf@T420.taylan> <56267302.7050606@yandex.ru> <87io61igyu.fsf@T420.taylan> <56267CDF.6010201@yandex.ru> <87wpuhh15s.fsf@T420.taylan> <562683B9.1060305@yandex.ru> <83y4exe71v.fsf@gnu.org> <87zizcfzna.fsf@T420.taylan> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445436460 8482 80.91.229.3 (21 Oct 2015 14:07:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:07:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich =?utf-8?Q?Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1=2FK?= =?utf-8?Q?ammer?=) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 21 16:07:23 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zou2w-0004XZ-T8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:07:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51741 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zou2v-0006uC-PN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:07:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44937) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zou2q-0006rO-RK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:07:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zou2l-0006NQ-0Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:07:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout26.012.net.il ([80.179.55.182]:43349) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zou2k-0006N6-Jj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:07:06 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout26.012.net.il by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NWK00500PXIJG00@mtaout26.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:10:21 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NWK00MKSQ19SS70@mtaout26.012.net.il>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:10:21 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87zizcfzna.fsf@T420.taylan> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.182 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:192279 Archived-At: > From: taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich Bay=C4=B1rl=C4=B1/Kamm= er) > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:29:13 +0200 >=20 > I provided clarification several times. It was ignored. No, it was not ignored. It was disagreed with, which is something entirely different. > One person got it and also repeated it in their words: > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-10/msg01464.htm= l After which I pushed a change that took care of the missing information. > And me again on the bug discussion: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2015-10/msg00676.ht= ml > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2015-10/msg00698.ht= ml >=20 > That makes at least 7 times in which I repeated the same thing, and= it > was ignored every time. No, it was not ignored. It was repeatedly read, considered, and _disagreed_ with. > Some of those mails contain very detailed, careful explanations of = the > issue, which I spent a lot of time on. At least 2 or 3 are of that > nature. And it took me a similarly considerable amount of time to re-read the same explanations over and over again, and then provide a polite response. All that because you completely refused to accept a simple comment that required you to make a change in a single line of code, so that your package will use a standard Emacs API. > I hope this makes it clear why I'm outraged. When I say something = like > "I repeated myself a dozen times and was ignored every time," the > "dozen" in that sentence is, by now, actually literal. That's absu= rd. You were NOT ignored. > What I gather from being persistently ignored is that I'm receiving > absolutely *no* respect *at all* from most people here. That is th= e one > and only reason I would start losing respect towards others. The > detailed and polite explanations of my problem listed above hopeful= ly > give a hint on which way the lack of respect primarily goes. There's no disrespect, there never was. Respecting an opinion does not mean it must be accepted. Rejecting an opinion or a patch doesn'= t mean disrespect, it just means disagreement, in this case on purely technical grounds. > The lack of respect I'm receiving is *not* of the kind where someon= e is > being actively nasty, insulting, etc. It's a kind where a person's= very > voice is being denied, not even countered. That's pretty grave. We should be allowed to disagree and reject patches even if there are no insults or obnoxious behavior on the part of the person who offers an opinion or a patch. Patches and opinions can be rejected on purel= y technical grounds, not only on the grounds of nasty conduct. IOW, we are not obliged to automatically accept patches just because their submitter is well behaved. We actually try to ignore his/her behavior as best as we can, and consider the patches only on technica= l merits. > I doubt most people who come to contribute code have much motivatio= n to > work out basic social issues. My feedback is probably the best you= will > get, and I'm not saying it's good at all. You are wrong. People do provide useful feedback here about these issues. Just yesterday we had such feedback from =C3=83=C2=93scar Fu= entes. > Most others will just leave the place immediately, or not even try > because they already saw in the archive or heard from others enough > horrible things about emacs-devel. =46rom whom did you hear horrible things about emacs-devel? What horrible things?