summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/07
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorodinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>2015-06-18 15:10:42 -0700
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-06-18 22:10:52 +0000
commit54f2024720459aaff90cf13e400f25b24833d460 (patch)
treec723d32735bd7139a96520e1edb9d0d2c022dea7 /07
parentc067e3c27d5ae7e6783b249185641cdda0325b19 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-54f2024720459aaff90cf13e400f25b24833d460.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-54f2024720459aaff90cf13e400f25b24833d460.zip
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers
Diffstat (limited to '07')
-rw-r--r--07/c7af9f7741659e0216b70d9669825049632d06147
1 files changed, 147 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/07/c7af9f7741659e0216b70d9669825049632d06 b/07/c7af9f7741659e0216b70d9669825049632d06
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..73e4bd427
--- /dev/null
+++ b/07/c7af9f7741659e0216b70d9669825049632d06
@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
+ helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
+ by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
+ (envelope-from <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>) id 1Z5i1M-0004rE-9w
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:10:52 +0000
+Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of riseup.net
+ designates 198.252.153.129 as permitted sender)
+ client-ip=198.252.153.129;
+ envelope-from=odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net;
+ helo=mx1.riseup.net;
+Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129])
+ by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
+ (Exim 4.76) id 1Z5i1J-0003r8-Va
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:10:52 +0000
+Received: from berryeater.riseup.net (berryeater-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.120])
+ (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
+ (Client CN "*.riseup.net",
+ Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK))
+ by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FA78422DA;
+ Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:10:44 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
+ (Authenticated sender: odinn.cyberguerrilla)
+ with ESMTPSA id 9A1723F632
+Message-ID: <558341E2.4010403@riseup.net>
+Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:10:42 -0700
+From: odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net>
+User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
+ rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
+References: <55828737.6000007@riseup.net>
+ <CANEZrP3M7+BsZKLFZV-0A_fC7NmMGbTDxsx3ywru3dSW78ZskQ@mail.gmail.com>
+In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3M7+BsZKLFZV-0A_fC7NmMGbTDxsx3ywru3dSW78ZskQ@mail.gmail.com>
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
+X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.7 at mx1
+X-Virus-Status: Clean
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
+X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
+ See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
+ -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
+ sender-domain
+ -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
+ no trust [198.252.153.129 listed in list.dnswl.org]
+ -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
+ -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
+ -0.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
+ domain
+ 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
+ not necessarily valid
+ 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid
+ 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay
+ lines
+ -0.1 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
+X-Headers-End: 1Z5i1J-0003r8-Va
+Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Concerns Regarding Threats by a Developer
+ to Remove Commit Access from Other Developers
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 22:10:52 -0000
+
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
+Hash: SHA1
+
+I maintain that you should apologize to those who traverse this list.
+ What you are saying is digging yourself a deeper hole and is not
+merely embarrassing but is crossing a threshold in which you have used
+words, albeit subtly, to attack a community.
+
+If you refuse to apologize, I get it. You have not apologized thus
+far, and pressing for an apology is unlikely to get an (authentic)
+one. But then, you should voluntarily step back and let others do the
+hard work of coming to the consensus that you seem to think is
+impossible to accomplish based on how bitcoin is run.
+
+I believe this matter will be resolved, but not with the "help" of
+those who make threatening statements (and who are unable to apologize
+for having made them).
+
+- -O
+
+On 06/18/2015 03:00 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
+> Dude, calm down. I don't have commit access to Bitcoin Core and
+> Gavin already said long ago he wouldn't just commit something, even
+> though he has the ability to do so.
+>=20
+> So why did I say it? Because it's consistent with what I've always
+> said: you cannot run a codebase like Wikipedia. Maintainers have to
+> take part in debates, and then make a decision, and anyone else who
+> was delegated commit access for robustness or convenience must then
+> respect that decision. It's the only way to keep a project making
+> progress at a reasonable pace.
+>=20
+> This is not a radical position. That's how nearly all coding
+> projects work. I have been involved with open source for 15 years
+> and the 'single maintainer who makes decisions' model is normal,
+> even if in some large codebases subsystems have delegated
+> submaintainers.
+>=20
+> This is also how all my own projects are run. Bitcoinj has
+> multiple people with commit access. Regardless, if there were to be
+> some design dispute or whatever, I wouldn't tolerate the others
+> with commit access starting some kind of Wiki-style edit war in the
+> code if they disagreed. Nor would I ever expect to get my own way
+> in other people's projects by threatening to revert the maintainers
+> changes.
+>=20
+> Core is in the weird position where there's no decision making
+> ability at all, because anyone who shows up and shouts enough can
+> generate 'controversy', then Wladimir sees there is disagreement
+> and won't touch the issue in question. So it just runs and runs and
+> /anyone/ with commit access can then block any change.
+>=20
+> I realise some people think this anti-process leads to better
+> decision making. I disagree. It leads to no decision making, which
+> is not the same thing at all.
+
+- --=20
+http://abis.io ~
+"a protocol concept to enable decentralization
+and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good"
+https://keybase.io/odinn
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
+Version: GnuPG v1
+
+iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVg0HiAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CXOwIAKSGRJPtSx+untgMERwE7lW7
+9p0gWz4jvKhyO+RrGPXlofckvp4Fp/7Yxa+TDLcXbzGi6OesX9yIyN7e06LJW4DP
+h7V2PwzS49ZyB/krd03HjvWMFnhoGy7zB7M1okq5myIvx+h1htX9TirNbDl7PU9Z
+SWyNNw+GXPsIV/xuPu81LP5GrR3gIxwwhhopOq2qcm08AUiuIJ8EA31mT2ZgwMWB
+RxrnktFRzMbW2fD7Z7njTz1gjw1duPyGApJ+xpqtcjjS2idPNuw1nESZTCE3+TwG
+Dk1AKmYt8TvZzFWyo/0ly7vYFFW27Yh7SC3oeDJBoWkvySuIFrevux7ekfKxPOc=3D
+=3Dwc2m
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
+
+