Mailing-List: contact dev-help@apr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030102160108.029dbe08@pop3.rowe-clan.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 23:20:24 -0600
To: <rbb@apache.org>
From: "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wrowe@apache.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: apr/test testfile.c
Cc: <dev@apr.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0301021155050.16904-100000@vangogh.rkbloom
 .net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030102130549.03671d90@pop3.rowe-clan.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 01:57 PM 1/2/2003, rbb@apache.org wrote:

>On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> At 12:37 PM 1/2/2003, rbb@apache.org wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>> >
>> >> In this case, I agree with Jeff's commit.  I also disagree that you can
>> >> veto a veto (which I consider Jeff's reversion of this test to be.)
>> >>
>> >> It was introduced as a pedantic test to try to illustrate to you, Ryan,
>> >> the futility of making all platforms behave *identically*.  That isn't
>> >> reasonable or feasible without adding a ton of extra cycles.
>> >>
>> >> Apparently this mental exercise didn't have the effects I had hoped.
>> >
>> >The "mental exercise" is pointless and not appreciated.  I expect more out
>> >of this group of people than childish games.  And yes, that is harsh, and
>> >yes I do mean it.  Will, we had a two e-mail conversation where nobody
>> >else participated and you decided to back-out your changes.
>>
>> At least for the foreseeable future, that will be s/else //.
>>
>> There is no "decision" involved in backing out vetoed code, period.
>
>Take a second look Will.  I specifically stated in all of my e-mails that
>it was a non-veto.

To quote the first paragraph of your original reply, <p>-1.</p>

One can state "I disagree with this change".  -1 has always meant "I object 
to this change".  There is a difference between polite disagreement that 
is open to discussion, and firmly stating the change is unacceptable.

-1's always meant "Unacceptable".

I wasn't against introducing better docs (I never am, and commit the fixes
myself when folks point out these issues.)  Documenting the disparities
seems like a good way to go.  This kept being framed in a test/don't test
sort of decision when that isn't the entire issue.

>> But I'm really past discussing any aspect of the test suite.  I'll let the one
>> of you argue it out amongst yourself.  As you point out, we were the only
>> two arguing, so my dropping out of the debate leaves the pleasant sound
>> of one hand clapping.
>>
>> If I have anything further to say, I'll say it with code.  Please, feel free
>> to simply back out test code you disagree with, as I won't be debating
>> the merits, and it saves the the list one fewer confrontational note.  If
>> you prefer that I don't commit code to test/ I'm fine with that as well.
>
>I have never said that I didn't want you to commit to test/.  I rather
>like that more people are getting involved.

So do I ... which is why I'm concerned that discussion will encourage 
more people to join the effort, while confrontation will discourage potential 
contributions.

>Tell you what.  I seem to be getting on everybody's bad side again.  

"everybody's"?  (gross overstatement.)  "bad side"?  (No... just difficult
for us to have productive discussions of strongly held opinions ... is that 
your doing, or mine, or some combination thereof?  I don't know.)

>Have fun with APR.  I have far too many projects to work on to spend time 
>on this project anymore.

My reaction is not to endlessly debate these issues, but simply continue 
to contribute 'in the framework' of whatever the other principals here agree to.
This is why I backed out my change.  This is why I offered a complimentary 
test.  This is why I kept fixing issues in spite of my anger/frustration with 
negative comments.  That's why I'll continue to do so as long as the help
is welcomed, as long as it doesn't involve long drawn out battles over the
"one true way".

I'm sorry that this was your reaction to what I believed was fair criticism.
If it was unfair, I apologize for my remarks.  I was reacting to the tone of
recent messages, just as you have.  We all have stresses going on that
let us jot out posts too quickly that are ill considered.  I share (shared, 
since sometime this past weekend) your disillusionment and frustration.

All that said... You've been a major contributor to the successes of this 
project, and I for one am sorry to see you step away, especially on this 
note.  I can only speak for myself, but your future participation and 
contributions will be missed, just as your past participation and 
contributions remain hugely appreciated.

Bill