From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Guile foreign object interface Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 18:26:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87d1dq745q.fsf@gnu.org> References: <1644439317.409814.1488469678720.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1644439317.409814.1488469678720@mail.yahoo.com> <87shmpcibe.fsf@gnu.org> <87r32988we.fsf@pobox.com> <877f40svma.fsf@gnu.org> <87r32867ni.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87lgsfjxhi.fsf@gnu.org> <87o9xb4bmn.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87y3webqij.fsf@gnu.org> <83wpbyfo5g.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1489080401 23374 195.159.176.226 (9 Mar 2017 17:26:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 17:26:41 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 09 18:26:36 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cm1pg-0005IX-Oj for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 18:26:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35473 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm1pm-0002xO-Sf for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 12:26:38 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52066) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm1pR-0002x5-97 for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 12:26:18 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm1pO-0001zM-2M for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 12:26:17 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:50841) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cm1pO-0001zI-08 for guile-user@gnu.org; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 12:26:14 -0500 Original-Received: from [193.50.110.248] (port=47042 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cm1pN-0003zr-8E; Thu, 09 Mar 2017 12:26:13 -0500 X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 19 =?utf-8?Q?Vent=C3=B4se?= an 225 de la =?utf-8?Q?R?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: <83wpbyfo5g.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 09 Mar 2017 17:47:07 +0200") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-user" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:13461 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii skribis: >> From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) >> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 13:09:40 +0100 >>=20 >> >> As an aside, please keep the tone friendly as is the norm on this >> >> mailing list. >> > >> > Disagreement is not the same as unfriendliness. >>=20 >> I agree. However I found the tone of your messages patronizing and >> aggressive, assuming bad faith and incompetence on the side of the Guile >> developers (=E2=80=9Cplanning for wreckage=E2=80=9D, =E2=80=9Cpretty poi= ntless=E2=80=9D, etc. etc.) > > FYI, I've communicated (and occasionally disagreed) with David for > many years, and I can assure you that you see something that simply > isn't there. He sometimes uses such "colorful" descriptions to make a > point more clear, that's all. People should be allowed to use their > personal style when writing, without being reprimanded, IMO. I=E2=80=99m all for personal style, but I=E2=80=99m against passive-aggress= ive or downright aggressive style. The problem is not whether the person who writes is well-meaning or not; the problem is how others perceive it. If I, as an old-timer and maintainer, feel attacked when reading these messages, I can only think that newcomers may feel uncomfortable joining the conversation, at best. We=E2=80=99d be doing a disservice to our group by sending the message that= it=E2=80=99s OK to be harsh to others. Ludo=E2=80=99.