TNG-stable

[Karl Denninger]

On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Gerald Carter wrote:
> Karl Denninger wrote:
> > 
> > Luke is free to express his opinion, particularly when 
> > it impacts on his efforts.
> > 
> > You are free to ignore them if you wish.
> > 
> > Science - and indeed, any study of anything - is not 
> > advanced by your pearl of wisdom. In fact, it is 
> > advanced by exactly the opposite.
> 
> Karl,  
> 
> Apparently you have have either not been aware or 
> have ignored the  background with this and therefore 
> I will boil it down for you.

You're welcome to boil whatever you want, but from my perspective what I
see here is a bunch of cats fighting.

> <synopsis>
> 
>   Luke decided he could not work within the boundaries
>   of the main samba code branch.  Therefore he was offered
>   a development branch for the sole purpose of continuing
>   his work and that would would be evaluated (as everyone's 
>   is) before bringing it back into the HEAD branch code.

There is no harm in this.  Further, he didn't have to be "offered"
anything, since Samba is publically CVSable.  He could have told you to
piss up a rope and done it without you (see the multiple times it was 
done with *BSD for examples)

>   However, Luke admits to basically forking the code, 
>   starting a community, and the dropping it.  It you 
>   are upset with anyone, talk to Luke.  IMO, it was 
>   irresponsible to fork the code and the drop it.  That's
>   what Luke did.  period.  Now no one is able to support
>   the community he developed.  Is that our fault?  No.
>   It was Luke's decision.

So what?  

I don't care about Luke's branch of the code.  It was insufficiently far
along for me to car when I last looked at it.  Yes, it was interesting, but
it didn't do what I needed, so I reverted to the stable operational branch.

>   But perhaps you think I'm being to harsh?  Let's look
>   at Luke's position on the pam_ntdom code he released as
>   well.  Or maybe other branches that resulted in the 
>   same thing

So what?

>   Now to the question of whether or not Samba will ever 
>   be able to act as a PDC, the answer is yes.  We are 
>   working on it.  

Timeline please.

That, by the way, is all the people who are carping here are asking for -
and have been now for quite a while (well over a year.)

I happen to like Samba.  A lot.  But what I don't like is the lack of any
kind of roadmap that is published - no targets, no knowledge of what's
going on internally.

> If you would like to help, please jump 
>   in.  We're really not a proud bunch and will gladly 
>   accept help.  Really. :-)

Well, I've been involved with this kind of stuff before, and I'm a hell of
a lot more careful than I once was with my time.  Personalities kill a lot
of good things, and this may be one of the many victims.

>   The reason that Luke's comments are innapropriate is that
>   you are only seeing the person who is yelling the loudest.

Nope.  That doesn't make them inappropriate at all.

When the public is ignored in its requests for PDC timelines (and it has
been) then this is what you can expect to see in response.

> </synopsis>
> 
> > If you are unable to stand the public heat of criticism, 
> > even heated criticism, get the hell out of the kitchen.
> 
> I don't know where you got this one from, but if you 
> think that Jeremy can't take and accept constructism 
> criticism, then you have no perspective at all.
> 
> If you have contructive things to say then, that's fine.
> But your personal attacks are unnecessary.

I, like Luke, have both the right to an opinion and to express it.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl at denninger.net) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net	Cost-effective Consulting Solutions
http://childrens-justice.org	Working to protect children's rights