geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Dillon" <>
Subject Re: Re: [RTC] Merge m2migration (functional m2 build) to trunk
Date Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:08:18 GMT
I have tried to be constructive... but I can only go so far until I
start to shutdown...

So far I've responded to Jacek several times about creating an issue.
The first was a response to a question if he should create an issue,
and I said yes.  So after several more emails still talking about no
issue and me responding with affirmation to create one... I really
don't have much more patience nor do I really know to best and
constructively respond to a situation like that.

And I really, really don't see how else I could have possibly
responded to his statement in any other constructive manner, about not
understanding my query after I had though that I really, clearly
stated exactly what I was asking.


On 7/24/06, Jeff Genender <> wrote:
> Jason,
> Do you think you could answer your peers a little bit more
> constructively?  Your answers to people are a bit caustic and it is not
> helping promote a healthy environment.  Is there something that we can
> help with to aid in a more amicable interaction with your peers?
> Jeff
> Jason Dillon wrote:
> >> I don't understand why it hasn't been reported in JIRA? An issue is
> >> not known unless it's reported in JIRA where people (like me) can
> >> notice it. I don't think the community follows each and every thread
> >> that's in dev@, so how could they know about it?
> >
> > So, for the 3rd time... file an issue.
> >
> >
> >>> Really don't understand why we have to bounce back and forth for
> >>> several days to get something done.  For example, I asked you for the
> >>> "length path" you ran under... and instead of actually giving me the
> >>> path which I asked for you, you give some explanation of why you were
> >>> in the lengthy past which I did not even ask for.
> >>
> >> I'm sounding as repeating myself, but as I didn't get the point I
> >> didn't respond as you requested. I believe the answer above is
> >> sufficient. As you wished ;-)
> >
> > How else would one answer the question "What is the lengthy path you ran
> > under?" except with the exact *lengthy path*?
> >
> > --jason

View raw message