diff options
author | odinn <odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net> | 2015-06-18 15:10:42 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2015-06-18 22:10:52 +0000 |
commit | 54f2024720459aaff90cf13e400f25b24833d460 (patch) | |
tree | c723d32735bd7139a96520e1edb9d0d2c022dea7 /07 | |
parent | c067e3c27d5ae7e6783b249185641cdda0325b19 (diff) | |
download | pi-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/c7af9f7741659e0216b70d9669825049632d06 | 147 |
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----- + + |