Re: Can we go GTK-only?

[John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2333 bytes --]

>>>>> John Wiegley <johnw@gnu.org> writes:

> To everyone: If you can't phrase your disagreements and observations in
> calm, rational language, then please refrain. We should be speaking to each
> other as though we were what we are: computer professionals who know what
> we're doing, and who all want Emacs to succeed.

Hi everyone,

It was brought up to me by a kind soul on IRC that my response to this thread
was very one-sided, as if I were defending only Eli and, by implication,
saying that others in this thread (Paul, Daniel, Perry, Stefan, primarily)
were the ones being defensive and disrespectful.

I did not come here to say that Eli was right. I came to say that discouraging
a contributor is *always wrong*. I love all of you, because you give your time
and energy freely to make my favorite piece of software in the world work
well. I don't want to see anyone become discouraged, ever. And when it
happens, I will fight back.

Each side has valid points in this discussion, but we are not making progress.
Eli has concerns, which automatically means that I share those concerns,
because this is how we work together. Others want evidence, and I agree that
we should find this evidence. If malloc is, or is not, thread-safe enough for
Emacs, is a great question that I'd like to see resolved.

I apologize if I came across as saying that everyone else should just pack up
and go home because the Great Maintainer Hath Spoken. My argument is with the
damaging nature of tone. We can too easily damage enthusiasm on this mailing
list, where tempers flare and words come cheap. Yet enthusiasm is the most
valuable commodity we have, since volunteerism is our only path to progress.

So to Paul, Daniel, Perry, Stefan and the rest: I hear you, you don't want us
to reject the use of malloc out of hand. To Eli: I hear you, experience has
given you pause, and while you don't have all the URLs ready at hand, you
don't want us to ignore your gut just yet.

Perhaps we can return to the original thread, asking if we can go GTK-only,
since it was going so well for 34 messages, before these next 61 took us down
a darker road.

-- 
John Wiegley                  GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F
http://newartisans.com                          60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 625 bytes --]