[opensuse-gnome] Weekly duties for Gnome-Meeting
Hello all, I have reason to reconsider my cooperation with the openSUSE-GNOME team as it appears, that fruitful and honest cooperation is not wanted. jpr seems to be content to fiddle with bug reports to his hearts content and does not deem it necessary to apologize if critized for it. Instead critical remarks get edited out, to be seen at Bug 395445 Bug 394408 If jpr does not restore the remarks and apologizes for censoring them I no longer see fit to cooperate and will drop weekly duties. Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Hi, Le mardi 03 juin 2008, à 10:34 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
Hello all,
I have reason to reconsider my cooperation with the openSUSE-GNOME team as it appears, that fruitful and honest cooperation is not wanted.
jpr seems to be content to fiddle with bug reports to his hearts content and does not deem it necessary to apologize if critized for it.
Instead critical remarks get edited out, to be seen at
Bug 395445 Bug 394408
I have no idea what has been going on there since I've never looked at those two bugs before -- so keep in mind that I might be missing some points :-) When I read the description of both bugs, my first feeling is that they are different bugs and I only start thinking they are duplicates when I read comment #7 in bug #394408, which might explain why JP did unmark the other bug as duplicate. Also, the general rule that the newer bug should be marked as duplicate of the older bug is only a guideline and there are many many cases where I've done the opposite on bugzilla.gnome.org since I've started triaging bugs in GNOME, so I can imagine it's the same on bnc. In this specific case, for example, Scott had analyzed the causes of the bug on the newer bug. So, to me, it just looks like the main issue here was that the bug you reported was not well-identified/understood at the beginning. Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 12:18 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Also, the general rule that the newer bug should be marked as duplicate of the older bug is only a guideline and there are many many cases where I've done the opposite on bugzilla.gnome.org since I've started triaging bugs in GNOME, so I can imagine it's the same on bnc.
what I do is keep the bug with more information open. It would be great
though, to have all new info from the closed bug(s) be added to the bug
that is kept open. That way, it wouldn't matter which one you set as
duplicate
--
Rodrigo Moya
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:34 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
Hello all,
I have reason to reconsider my cooperation with the openSUSE-GNOME team as it appears, that fruitful and honest cooperation is not wanted.
jpr seems to be content to fiddle with bug reports to his hearts content and does not deem it necessary to apologize if critized for it.
Instead critical remarks get edited out, to be seen at
Bug 395445 Bug 394408
If jpr does not restore the remarks and apologizes for censoring them I no longer see fit to cooperate and will drop weekly duties.
Reading the bugs, I see nothing offensive in the part of JP, so please
calm down :-) it's probably just a misunderstanding. JP is looking at
all the bugs almost every day, so he might have overlooked something.
But I really don't see anything so offensive as to require apologies.
So please, don't take things too personal, I assure you there's no game
being played, and your help is very much wanted, so whatever
misunderstanding there was, let's just discuss it, no need to reconsider
your cooperation with the openSUSE-GNOME team please :-)
--
Rodrigo Moya
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:34 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
Hello all,
I have reason to reconsider my cooperation with the openSUSE-GNOME team as it appears, that fruitful and honest cooperation is not wanted.
It definitely is wanted. Your reporting and now your bug squashing and meeting help are greatly appreciated.
jpr seems to be content to fiddle with bug reports to his hearts content and does not deem it necessary to apologize if critized for it.
I did not see the questions/comments from last friday unfortunately. Currently I'm getting somewhere between 300-500 bug mails a day and I missed your followup comments there :-/. It was definitely *not* purposely ignoring you.
Instead critical remarks get edited out, to be seen at
Bug 395445 Bug 394408
If jpr does not restore the remarks and apologizes for censoring them I no longer see fit to cooperate and will drop weekly duties.
I don't think I have the power to remove comments (even on purpose),
what is missing?
The original bug description said that the crash occurred after packages
were updated, so I was not sure it was a duplicate (and we had no other
reports at the time of crash on update), and your comment about
occurring every time at start came after I un-duped the bugs.
Additionally bug 395445 already had the blocker and ship_stopper+ flag
on it, which would flag it as blocking the gold master release. Ideally
you dupe to the older bug, but there are cases where its unclear, more
information ends up in the new bug, etc where you have exceptions.
What I did fail to do was make a good, clear comment in the original bug
394408 about why I unduped it and referencing it to the newer bug, that
was my fault, sorry.
You are one of the best bug reporters we have (both for GNOME and the
project as a whole), I would hate to lose you.
(We really need to publish triage guidelines in a more comprehensive way
project wide).
-JP
--
JP Rosevear
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 09:09 -0400, JP Rosevear wrote:
On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 10:34 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
Hello all,
I have reason to reconsider my cooperation with the openSUSE-GNOME team as it appears, that fruitful and honest cooperation is not wanted.
It definitely is wanted. Your reporting and now your bug squashing and meeting help are greatly appreciated.
jpr seems to be content to fiddle with bug reports to his hearts content and does not deem it necessary to apologize if critized for it.
I did not see the questions/comments from last friday unfortunately. Currently I'm getting somewhere between 300-500 bug mails a day and I missed your followup comments there :-/. It was definitely *not* purposely ignoring you.
Instead critical remarks get edited out, to be seen at
Bug 395445 Bug 394408
If jpr does not restore the remarks and apologizes for censoring them I no longer see fit to cooperate and will drop weekly duties.
I don't think I have the power to remove comments (even on purpose), what is missing?
The original bug description said that the crash occurred after packages were updated, so I was not sure it was a duplicate (and we had no other reports at the time of crash on update), and your comment about occurring every time at start came after I un-duped the bugs. Additionally bug 395445 already had the blocker and ship_stopper+ flag on it, which would flag it as blocking the gold master release. Ideally you dupe to the older bug, but there are cases where its unclear, more information ends up in the new bug, etc where you have exceptions.
What I did fail to do was make a good, clear comment in the original bug 394408 about why I unduped it and referencing it to the newer bug, that was my fault, sorry.
You are one of the best bug reporters we have (both for GNOME and the project as a whole), I would hate to lose you.
(We really need to publish triage guidelines in a more comprehensive way project wide).
-JP
JPR, no harm done, I just felt that somebody was playing games on bug fixing and also took the liberty to censor critical comments on that. If I charged you with that unjustly, I beg your pardon. If you haven't, then somebody else having the technical capability to change bugzilla entries and using them on occasion has taken the liberty to do so. http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?query=395445&ad As free speech is a major right to be preserved, I feel this issue should be taken care of at a management level. I don't think that it is very attractive for new users to join a distribution where their comments get censored if somebody feels they are inappropriate. Casual P.S. I won't be able to attend todays meeting, at least not full time, so it would be nice if somebody sent me the log after it's finished so I can continue the weekly duties ;-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Hi, Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
If you haven't, then somebody else having the technical capability to change bugzilla entries and using them on occasion has taken the liberty to do so.
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?query=395445&ad
I looked at the mails there and I don't see any comment there that is not also on bugzilla, but I could be mistaken. Do you have a link to the comment(s) that disappeared? (fwiw, I agree that removing comments is bad) Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi,
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
If you haven't, then somebody else having the technical capability to change bugzilla entries and using them on occasion has taken the liberty to do so.
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?query=395445&ad
I looked at the mails there and I don't see any comment there that is not also on bugzilla, but I could be mistaken. Do you have a link to the comment(s) that disappeared?
(fwiw, I agree that removing comments is bad)
Vincent
-- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
This is getting absurd, as you can see at http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?list=all&page=1&query=395445&size=10 msg18679 it is comment #4 ( by me ) of Bug 395445 The one above it, msg18956, which should be comment #5 is actually comment #8 ( by jpr ) of Bug 395445. So someone ( not jpr as we now know ) has managed to remove comments #5, #6 and #7 from the mailinglist archives too. The comments were still in the archives when I sent the mail pointing them out. Also someone has further fiddled Bug 395445 in Bugzilla, as it now looks as though only one entry ( comment #6 ) had been removed, while in fact 3 are (still) missing Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 12:21 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi,
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
If you haven't, then somebody else having the technical capability to change bugzilla entries and using them on occasion has taken the liberty to do so.
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?query=395445&ad
I looked at the mails there and I don't see any comment there that is not also on bugzilla, but I could be mistaken. Do you have a link to the comment(s) that disappeared?
(fwiw, I agree that removing comments is bad)
Vincent
-- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
This is getting absurd, as you can see at
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?list=all&page=1&query=395445&size=10
msg18679 it is comment #4 ( by me ) of Bug 395445
The one above it, msg18956, which should be comment #5 is actually comment #8 ( by jpr ) of Bug 395445.
That's because the search results are not sorted by time, but by relevance, as far as I can tell (see the rank in the search result). If you click on one message and use the thread overview at the left, it all seems to be consistent. Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:48 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 12:21 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi,
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
If you haven't, then somebody else having the technical capability to change bugzilla entries and using them on occasion has taken the liberty to do so.
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?query=395445&ad
I looked at the mails there and I don't see any comment there that is not also on bugzilla, but I could be mistaken. Do you have a link to the comment(s) that disappeared?
(fwiw, I agree that removing comments is bad)
Vincent
-- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
This is getting absurd, as you can see at
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?list=all&page=1&query=395445&size=10
msg18679 it is comment #4 ( by me ) of Bug 395445
The one above it, msg18956, which should be comment #5 is actually comment #8 ( by jpr ) of Bug 395445.
That's because the search results are not sorted by time, but by relevance, as far as I can tell (see the rank in the search result). If you click on one message and use the thread overview at the left, it all seems to be consistent.
Vincent
-- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
You are right Vincent, they still are visible in the archives: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-bugs/2008-05/msg19647.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-bugs/2008-05/msg19649.html So my searching qualities need a brushup :-( Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:58 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:48 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 12:21 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote: You are right Vincent,
they still are visible in the archives:
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-bugs/2008-05/msg19647.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-bugs/2008-05/msg19649.html
Just so I'm certain, these are the comments that were thought to be
missing, but they are actually available and in the bug right?
-JP
--
JP Rosevear
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 09:41 -0400, JP Rosevear wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:58 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 12:48 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 12:21 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote: You are right Vincent,
they still are visible in the archives:
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-bugs/2008-05/msg19647.html http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-bugs/2008-05/msg19649.html
Just so I'm certain, these are the comments that were thought to be missing, but they are actually available and in the bug right?
-JP
Actually yes, this confuses me as I am pretty certain they were removed from the bug and also Bug shows still a break between comment #5 and comment #7 where comment #6 is missing. To put the issue to rest, let's call it my fault, and just see to it, that censoring will _not_ take place at any rate. Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 16:37 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
this confuses me as I am pretty certain they were removed from the bug and also Bug shows still a break between comment #5 and comment #7 where comment #6 is missing.
Comment can be marked "Novell internal" and therefore no appear to non Novell people. This is actually the case. No reason to be paranoid. Hub -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 10:42 -0400, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 16:37 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
this confuses me as I am pretty certain they were removed from the bug and also Bug shows still a break between comment #5 and comment #7 where comment #6 is missing.
Comment can be marked "Novell internal" and therefore no appear to non Novell people.
This is actually the case. No reason to be paranoid.
Hub
Thanks Hub, that's most probably the explanation for what has happened, so I ( and other non Novell users ) couldn't see my comments anymore while you all were saying "what is he on about, it's all there", and probably just as easy to uncheck the censored comments and let somebody appear as "paranoid" Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 11:51 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi,
Le jeudi 05 juin 2008, à 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer a écrit :
If you haven't, then somebody else having the technical capability to change bugzilla entries and using them on occasion has taken the liberty to do so.
http://lists.opensuse.org/cgi-bin/search.cgi?query=395445&ad
I looked at the mails there and I don't see any comment there that is not also on bugzilla, but I could be mistaken. Do you have a link to the comment(s) that disappeared?
(fwiw, I agree that removing comments is bad)
Vincent
-- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
In case you ask yourself what the heck could be so dangerous to read for participants in bugzilla.novell.com that it requires drastical censorship reminiscent of George Orwell ( changing the past ) After jpr had removed my dupe and a few comments later sreeves had declared Bug 394408 as duplicate of Bug 395445 I ventured to add a comment that is still to be seen at https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=394408#c10 if not removed after someone receives this mail.. ------- Comment #10 From Casual J. Programmer 2008-05-30 23:21:46 MDT [reply] ------- What kind of game playing is this ? I already marked Bug 395445 as duplicate of this one - Bug 394408 - in comment #5, this has been redone by jpr on grounds I can not anticipate. As far as house rules are concerned, newer bugs get to be duplicates of older bugs, not vice versa. 394408 < 395445 if I am not mistaken! This Comment was then followed by a remark that Bug 394408 had in fact been filed 2008-05-26 01:24 MDT and discussed with sreeves on IRC, while Bug 395445 had only been reported 2008-05-29 08:30 MDT and all the ugly bug fuzz could have been prevented, if Bug 394408 had been acted on in a timely fashion. Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
P.S. I won't be able to attend todays meeting, at least not full time, so it would be nice if somebody sent me the log after it's finished so I can continue the weekly duties ;-)
Hmm... It's just after 5 a.m. my time here in the U.S. I checked the wiki for meeting time and was shocked to find out we're meeting earlier than we ever did before. But, like a good little boy, I got up. Now there's hardly anyone here. How did we end up with a new time-shift meeting time? Bryen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 05:29 -0500, Bryen wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
P.S. I won't be able to attend todays meeting, at least not full time, so it would be nice if somebody sent me the log after it's finished so I can continue the weekly duties ;-)
Hmm... It's just after 5 a.m. my time here in the U.S. I checked the wiki for meeting time and was shocked to find out we're meeting earlier than we ever did before. But, like a good little boy, I got up. Now there's hardly anyone here. How did we end up with a new time-shift meeting time?
Bryen
Actually I took the time for first meeting of month from the archives, also sent a message to opensuse-gnome as well as opensuse-announce and nobody complained... Casual -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 05:29 -0500, Bryen wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 10:03 +0200, Casual J. Programmer wrote:
P.S. I won't be able to attend todays meeting, at least not full time, so it would be nice if somebody sent me the log after it's finished so I can continue the weekly duties ;-)
Hmm... It's just after 5 a.m. my time here in the U.S. I checked the wiki for meeting time and was shocked to find out we're meeting earlier than we ever did before. But, like a good little boy, I got up. Now there's hardly anyone here. How did we end up with a new time-shift meeting time?
Its my fault, I totally forgot about time shifting because we entered
June. Did the meeting take place?
-JP
--
JP Rosevear
participants (6)
-
Bryen -
Casual J. Programmer -
Hubert Figuiere -
JP Rosevear -
Rodrigo Moya -
Vincent Untz