"webkit-dev-owner@lists.webkit.org" to me show details 10:12 am (10 minutes ago) You are not allowed to post to this mailing list, and your message has been automatically rejected. If you think that your messages are being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at webkit-dev-owner@lists.webkit.org. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: lkcl <luke.leighton@gmail.com> To: webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:12:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [webkit-dev] Completing the goal of Webkit DOM bindings [was Re: GDOM patch spam] Eric Seidel-6 wrote:

I just closed out many of the GDOM bugs for patch spam after emailing the author of these patches.

eric, it falls to me, because nobody else is going to do it, to hold up a mirror and to show you the implications of what you've just said. you have said, "i just aggravated the process of achieving the goal of useful and useable webkit gobject bindings , by calling the combined contributions of many experienced developers 'Stupid Postings And Mailings' ..." as you work for google, is that an official position of google, to insult martin soto's work, helmut's work, alp toker's work, my work, and many other contributors, by calling their contributions "stupid"? Eric Seidel-6 wrote:

The proper process for getting code into WebKit does not involve uploading 15 unexplained patches at once.

this again does not contribute to the goal. let's track it through. 1) david suggested that #16401 be split into smaller patches. 2) faithfully following the instructions and the process, you and i worked very well together to get several of those patches to an acceptable standard 3) you asked that one of them be split further. 4) faithfully following the process, i split them further, and created a series of patches, citing our conversation at the top of each of them. 5) having created the bugreports, i take the bugreport numbers and place them into the CHANGELOG entries, in order to comply with the process. 6) mark rowe ignores the link to the conversation and closes all of the bugs _before_ the attachments have been uploaded. how _exactly_ is this _not_ faithfully following the process, eric? this is not a rhetorical question. Eric Seidel-6 wrote:

That tends to result only in annoying reviewers and getting you banned from the bug tracker. :)

i know you think you are meaning well by adding a smiley, but in this instance it's not a good indication of your state of mind. firstly, quoting a very wise person i know: "stress is where the mind compares the external view with the internal one; finds that the discrepancy is too great and seeks to place blame on the EXTERNAL world". so - let's translate what you've put: " That tends to result only in the reviewers comparing their view of how the review process should be, against the way that it is being used in good faith, having a feeling of "annoyance" and the reviewers then BLAMING the submitter. in fact, the reviewers feel that it is SO important that their view of how the review process be rigidly adhered to that if anyone else causes them a feeling of "annoyance", they will BAN that submitter from the bug tracker. i, eric seidel, find this to be very very funny and amusing". how, exactly, eric, is insulting contributors by calling their contributions "stupid", and by declaring up-front that anyone who does not stick rigidly to a process ( a process which was never designed with such a comprehensive contribution in mind that requires a _dozen_ separate programming skills as well as the infinite patience of a saint ) - anyone not sticking rigidly to the "process" will be BANNED, how exactly is this "funny"? this is not a rhetorical question. much _much_ more importantly, how does such a statement _contribute_ to the completion of the goal? Eric Seidel-6 wrote:

The GDOM binding patches have some history of trouble.

translation: the attitude of some of reviewers has been shockingly disrespectful towards enthusiastic and highly skilled contributors, and they have sought to engineer ways in which the submitters can be blamed, outright, for absolutely everything. the reviewers consider themselves to be unimpeachable and above-board in every way. the contributors have been caught completely off-guard by the hostile attitude, and initially reacted very badly, but after consideration decided to continue - even in the face of absolutely shockingly bad attitudes of some of the reviewers, in the interests of free software and in the interests of completing the goal. summary: yeah. trouble. Eric Seidel-6 wrote:

I think if anyone wants to work on GDOM patches they need to talk to one of the long-standing Gtk contributers and approach this one patch at a time.

great. i will contact them, immediately. i trust that all contributors will be given the respect that should always go without saying, in working towards a common goal, and i trust that the contributors will afford the same respect towards the reviewers in working with what is an incredibly tedious, ill-defined and ill-equipped process, to complete the goal of providing webkit with free software gobject bindings to its DOM model. l. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/GDOM-patch-spam-tp24944390p24969868.html Sent from the Webkit mailing list archive at Nabble.com.