From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Maintainers and contributors Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:04:34 +0300 Message-ID: <5628D0D2.4050507@yandex.ru> References: <87si59wj42.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> <87fv13xirw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445515519 12114 80.91.229.3 (22 Oct 2015 12:05:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel To: bruce.connor.am@gmail.com, David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 22 14:05:17 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 1ZpEc8-0001xG-31 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 14:05:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59260 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpEc7-0002o3-CV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:04:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48444) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpEbs-0002nv-9Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:04:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpEbm-0007pH-KF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:04:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]:34950) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpEbm-0007oG-DK; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:04:38 -0400 Original-Received: by wicll6 with SMTP id ll6so132049817wic.0; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:04:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TCLvYUxLGxu7BDDn9ZCPD4tmZklfmtoQmqhK9A/b9Yg=; b=a90gfaUfU7RC66xWNQS8Ool6G/i8iAWYfbPpZufRb6nQ9iGxPbraVhhbe7+86c/XaY Fm9Hoz2v4PBFUxH8qdx2x1Zf/M81fcGA4yIqLuLY76yOTLhwCfrfdXOhZgBPOZqEwRKc 73WMM1cxWtBTINf0adp6n8T/XxspdPnq5XCdTXGK6harEu3DulJUMRf9m212e3KtqoSE xMkKsdQ0BdcGPll+KaO9+1dkGHe5/Ze7ZBEgxUI2EaBlvgCZIV/YPZZIABjVzQj8LTnr x6pNfnlM/EJw8Bgkv8BIZiohb0qcgOuLJWLid/tizSQxiIZJUr4LtPchhcANBjcEWNRM Y9lQ== X-Received: by 10.180.93.168 with SMTP id cv8mr41709886wib.54.1445515477772; Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [10.9.0.103] (nat.webazilla.com. [78.140.128.228]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id qr6sm26132582wic.13.2015.10.22.05.04.35 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:04:36 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/42.0 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b 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:192368 Archived-At: On 10/22/2015 02:55 PM, Artur Malabarba wrote: > The problem is that too often these conversations rotate around the > same point without going anywhere. This message would be a way to make > sure the conversation is progressing, and not an attempt to put a full > stop on it (I see the previous version didn't communicate this well). > Note that this would only be done if the same point has already gone > back and forth twice. I don't think number 4 would have helped in the latest incident. If the submitter is dead-set on an idea and doesn't want to heed, "we all agree on disagreeing with you" would probably spark the same reactions that we've already seen. The reviewers are tyrants, the mailing list has problems and needs a psychologist. So I rather also put a nice list of rules somewhere that makes it clear that at some point you listen to the reviewers, or go away. Maybe with a nice of explanation of why that's important. The amount of time wasted on that recent thread has been staggering.