The project page [1] does not list lead selection date. This usually means the last selection took place prior to the field being added. According to GLEP 39 [2]: > This [lead] selection must occur at least once every 12 months Please fill the missing data and run the selection process if overdue. [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Forums [2] https://www.gentoo.org/glep/glep-0039.html
There is no requirement for it to be set and no evident benefit from it being set. A brief search did not even yield documentation of it in the expected locations.
The 'evident benefit' is that we can verify whether you're following GLEP 39. If you want to hide it, I have reasons to believe Forums project is not holding elections according to GLEP 39 and instead you're running is as self-appointed tyrant.
The paranoid delusions of someone who has publicly stated that they cannot distinguish technical disagreements from personal attacks are neither my domain of responsibility nor interest. As for being self appointed, you might have noticed that I am hardly the sole member of the project and that I get one vote in our elections like everyone else. If someone within Gentoo who does not have a specific history of trolling and attacking the project and its members were to me that this evidently pointless busywork has some value, I would take them at their word and update the wiki page and fill out the field of seemingly undocumented ongoing busywork which seems to be called for (especially in this case) purely on the basis of imagined technicality. As it is, this bug smacks of petty trolling and busywork, neither of which merit further action.
Dean, I understand that you have problem with me and want to get some petty revenge on me. However, once more I'd like to ask you to behave professionally and let our differences aside when it comes to technical matters. Please set the date so that my election reminding script stops flagging the project as needing new election. Doing so would require much less work than your tirades, though I understand it's less satisfying than attacking me.
I will address your stated concerns, but please, do not persist in abusing bugzilla as, in effect, a chat venue. (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #4) > Dean, I understand that you have problem with me and want to get some petty > revenge on me. Then you understand one thing correctly, I do indeed have issues with your behavior. However, revenge is a game for suckers and rather more your style than mine. Petty revenge all the more so. Rather the contrary, my (admittedly vain) hope regarding you is the same as for any other troll: that one day you learn to behave like a functional adult; to take criticism of your ideas and actions as opportunities to improve or at very least reconsider them, not the phantom personal attacks that you perceive now; and perhaps, if we are all extremely lucky, to learn to yourself provide constructive critique without vitriol. > However, once more I'd like to ask you to behave > professionally and let our differences aside when it comes to technical > matters. Considering that your practical definition of professional behavior (as determined by your exercise of it) freely includes trolling and libel, I would appear to be well within the bounds you set for yourself. Still, allow me to clarify something for you: "professional" conduct is, at its heart, courtesy. Courtesy is itself essentially a basic level of social interaction in a community. From that baseline one can remain effectively neutral, or earn respect, or demonstrate that they are not worth the effort of such courtesy. You have made a distinct habit of the third option, to the point where you merit decorum simply due to consideration for the community at large, neither general courtesy nor respect being warranted by your behavior. > Please set the date so that my election reminding script stops > flagging the project as needing new election. Your personal scripts responding incorrectly to valid inputs is a bug in your scripts, not in their input. > Doing so would require much > less work than your tirades, though I understand it's less satisfying than > attacking me. Again, you vastly overestimate your importance to me, you have shown yourself to be a troll to be avoided or ignored, and interacted with only as required by circumstance. You are not my personal boogeyman, no matter how much you seem to think you are or wish to fill that role.
@comrel, could you please help me convince desultory to work with others, and fill in this little missing detail that would be helpful to me rather than refusing it on the basis of 'mgorny requested it'?
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #6) > @comrel, could you please help me convince desultory to work with others, > and fill in this little missing detail that would be helpful to me rather > than refusing it on the basis of 'mgorny requested it'? In case you missed it, desultory said "I will address your stated concerns". As such, I for one fail to see what any convincing could be doing here, but that's me. :] (I was not tyrannised into saying this.)
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #6) Michał, even though Dean or other members of the Forums could have "obliged" to your request, they would have done it per "courtesy" or "respect" as Dean mentioned on a previous comment. You, an individual developer, have not been granted by anyone the power to "demand" anything from everyone else. The fact that you're complaining that someone doesn't want to work with you, and I haven't seen you present any evidence that Dean, or for that matter anyone else in the Forums team, is refusing to work with anyone else, only hints that the issue might be related to you. As many as tried to explain in the past, "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar"[1]. [1] - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_can_catch_more_flies_with_honey_than_with_vinegar As someone that received 4 e-mails from you, to 4 different teams, about this, a simple change in attitude, from: The project page [1] does not list lead selection date. This usually means the last selection took place prior to the field being added. According to GLEP 39 [2]: > This [lead] selection must occur at least once every 12 months Please fill the missing data and run the selection process if overdue. to: Fellow Gentoo developers, as the project page [1] for your project does not list lead selection date and that usually means the last selection took place prior to the field being added or that you have forgotten to conduct an election or update the page, can you please fill the missing data and or run the election process if that's overdue? As you know, according to GLEP 39 [2]: > This [lead] selection must occur at least once every 12 months would go a long way. It would certainly be more likely to motivate others to help you. > @comrel, could you please help me convince desultory to work with others, > and fill in this little missing detail that would be helpful to me rather > than refusing it on the basis of 'mgorny requested it'? As a ComRel member, do you really want us to review the case here? What we will have to evaluate is this dispute, not your request for us to help you enforce your view on others.
(In reply to Chiitoo from comment #7) > (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #6) > > @comrel, could you please help me convince desultory to work with others, > > and fill in this little missing detail that would be helpful to me rather > > than refusing it on the basis of 'mgorny requested it'? > > In case you missed it, desultory said "I will address your stated concerns". I'm sorry, I did not understand this as 'I will do it' but as 'I will reply to you'. (In reply to Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto from comment #8) > As a ComRel member, do you really want us to review the case here? > What we will have to evaluate is this dispute, not your request for us to > help you enforce your view on others. Well, since I definitely lack the social skill here, I was hoping ComRel members would use theirs to help me improve the communications.
un-CCing ComRel as this is unclear what we supposed to do here. I believe ComRel should not try to force people following GLEP39. @mgorny, as far as I am aware nobody authorized you to open all these bugs, so you do all on your own. That said, you can expect people to disagree with you. As I see you have filed large amount of bugs, which depicts a situation as the common Gentoo problem, the best way to handle this is to propose global changes rather than perceive personal disagreement as the communication problem.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #9) > (In reply to Chiitoo from comment #7) > > (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #6) > > > @comrel, could you please help me convince desultory to work with others, > > > and fill in this little missing detail that would be helpful to me rather > > > than refusing it on the basis of 'mgorny requested it'? > > > > In case you missed it, desultory said "I will address your stated concerns". > > I'm sorry, I did not understand this as 'I will do it' but as 'I will reply > to you'. I had not considered that as a meaning myself, but now that you mention it, it does seem like a possible reading of it. :] Either way, I can say that it's not that we have been ignoring the GLEP, and I maybe guess we collectively forgot about setting the date(s) at the wikki; this will be fixed, I am quite sure about that.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #6) > @comrel, could you please help me convince desultory to work with others, > and fill in this little missing detail that would be helpful to me rather > than refusing it on the basis of 'mgorny requested it'? To be clear, and to once again restate, my objections to this are as follows: 1. There is no documentation, that I could find, for the field regarding what the valid values and formats are and quite when it is to be set (e.g. election or nomination, start or completion, whether it is to be set somehow to indicate an ongoing election and so on (note that, again, anything beyond election completion being required would be pointless busywork)). Note that documentation needs to be written down somewhere, not "ask $person", unless we have verified recoverable backups of $person. Thus the bug appears to be invalid. 2. As implied by item 1, there is no requirement for the field to be filled, thus without some benefit to filling it out it is effectively just adding (at least annual) busywork. At the very least this would be a soft measure regardless, as teams are allowed to vote in whatever manner they choose, even a verbal vote at a personal meeting if a team can arrange it. Thus the bug appears to be invalid. 3. No such benefit had been established. Thus the bug appears to be invalid. 4. There was no indication whatsoever that this was even related to anything beyond a personal request (see prior points for why that is insufficient), which was expressly indicated to be misbehavior of scripts with regard to expressly valid input. Thus the bug appears to be invalid. 5. The scripts in question are not so much as visible to those to whom the bug was (and is) assigned, let alone theirs to maintain. Thus the bug appears to be invalid, or at very least assigned to the wrong parties. The manner in which the bug was presented was already covered by jmbsvicetto, and for the time being I will leave it at that.
I know it's undocumented and I have no clue where to document it. However, it is rather clear that the purpose is to make it clear that selection takes place regularly. I would suggest putting the date when lead started his reign after the last election. This is what most of the other developers have no problem doing. The scripts are invisible because I'm still working on them. I'm doing semi-manual research before deploying them. So far you're the only person who refuses to help.
GLEP 39 requires a lead election every 12 months. Some interpretations of the GLEP could even imply that if such hasn't happened, the project does not exist anymore. As that's not what we want here, please fill the date with when the last election concluded; if the last election happened over 12 months ago, or that date is nearing, please run a project lead election as you deem fit. It doesn't have to be the current lead arranging it ("This selection must occur at least once every 12 months, and may occur at any time."). It doesn't have to be only one lead either (so some project for example simply do an "if multiple people gather same amount of votes, they become co-leads" approach). "Last elected" in wiki is rather clear in its existing wording imho - it is the date when the recorded lead or leads were last elected, that is when the last election concluded and they became the project leads. The project lead existence is rationalized as: "By having the members choose their project leads periodically, the project leads are necessarily at least somewhat responsible (and hopefully responsive) to the project members." Additionally it is a primary point of contact for other projects for coordination matters. So in short, you should already have lead elections at least once every 12 months, and all that is wanted here is to record that on the project page accordingly for public record. I don't see anything outrageous in that request.
(In reply to Michał Górny from comment #13) > I know it's undocumented and I have no clue where to document it. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_Wiki:Developer_Central/Project_pages Or, better: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Template:Project > However, > it is rather clear that the purpose is to make it clear that selection takes > place regularly. I would suggest putting the date when lead started his > reign after the last election. This is what most of the other developers > have no problem doing. > Even just a comment specifying canonical format would be a marked improvement over the current state. > The scripts are invisible because I'm still working on them. I'm doing > semi-manual research before deploying them. So far you're the only person > who refuses to help. Mass filing bugs and slow playing the actual reasons for them are poor approaches for research and development.
(In reply to Mart Raudsepp from comment #14) > So in short, you should already have lead elections at least once every 12 > months, and all that is wanted here is to record that on the project page > accordingly for public record. I don't see anything outrageous in that > request. You are making an inference not in evidence, my objections have at no point been on the grounds that GLEP 39 is somehow invalid or inapplicable, and indeed have been in part based on GLEP 39 itself. Having undocumented requirements is a very slippery slope, with all manner of hazards arrayed along the way down; as such any and all should be considered "outrageous". Adding a comment to a wiki template "this field is now required, the format is to be YYYY-MM-DD" hardly seems like a major ask. Though the grounds on which it would itself be required could be considered questionable, as again this is so far just one person doing something for no particular reason, so perhaps "this field is required for confirmation of conformance with GLEP 39" or some such would be more sound (though again, given how elections are handled this seems odd regardless). Still, per my earlier comment on this bug, once the currently running election is concluded, the date will be added to the project wiki page.
