seed changes

[George Brooke]

Are the ISOs broken because of this dispute or is it completely 
unrelated - if so do you need ISO testers?

solar.george

Lionel Le Folgoc wrote:
> Jani Monoses a écrit :
>   
>> I fail to see the logic in that, probably because there is none. Any 
>> leader of a project has to justify or at least explain what is behind 
>> his decisions. Otherwise I could just as publicly state that I am back 
>> and we can start a pointless and long fight if none of the sides wishes 
>> to back up its positions. As a user of Xubuntu I demand to know why 
>> these decisions were made.
>>     
>
> Just for the record: *you* started the war by reverting the seeds
> without speaking of this here first. ^_~
>
>   
>> So please refrain from perpetrating bogus ideas such as the above.
>>     
>
> * I justified the changes, just re-read your mails (yeah, that could be
> hard, but try, no, really, try again...):
>   - gnome-screensaver has a huge security issue when xfwm4 compositing
> is enabled, and thus won't be seeded in xubuntu. Since the *only* active
> xubuntu bugtriager (Jérôme) resigned thanks to you, this won't be
> forwarded upstream. And if you want to be useful, please don't produce a
> buggy patch containing big layering violations (such as your thunar
> patches) which is gonna be rejected by upstream as usual, just forward
> this issue upstream...
>   - gnome-mount does not integrate well with thunar/exo (double
> combo-box problem for example). Same issue here, it seems you are able
> to skip the explanations only to start your little war.
>   - xfce4-taskmanager: not buggy anymore since I reverted your broken
> upload, and it does integrate well with the rest of the xfce desktop.
>
> That's the main changes, and I already justified them.
>
> We already agreed on some other changes:
> * gnome-games: I'll put them back when you stop playing with the seeds
> * squeeze/file-roller: squeeze is currently broken, so I'll put back
> file-roller.
>
> But, I say it again, I'm just repeating what I wrote in previous mails
> (which you probably skipped on purpose).
>
>   
>> This being said, if I get no clear answers and truly open development 
>> I'll take this before the Ubuntu Community Council and ask everyone 
>> involved to attend. This is not just about Xubuntu, it is about ignoring 
>> fundamental principles of open development that govern the Ubuntu community.
>>     
>
> Whoa, you are kidding, right? But please do it, I guess that'll be funny.
>
> Some random points:
>
> * open development process: coming from you, that's only a huge
> mascarade. May I remind you that you _never_ listened to Gauvain and I,
> even when we were taking car of all the packaging stuff? It seems you
> have the ability to ignore people who do not agree with you (especially
> when we talk about upstream)...
>
> * support: same here, you never supported any xubuntu release. You
> haven't even touched an xfce package for ten months, except to broke
> xfce4-utils screensaver support in gutsy. Security-support? LOL. I did
> the only xubuntu security upload ever (xfce4-terminal). Actually, there
> are two CVE waiting for you (2007-6531 and 2007-6532). But one more
> time, you prefer mailing stupid things rather than helping me.
>
> Thus let's go before the Motu Council if you want (xfce is in universe
> now, so this should be raised at first before the motu council and not
> the Community Council imho).
>
> You are just gonna waste everyone's time: xubuntu iso are still
> completely broken, no more bug triaging occurred since, no time for
> security-support, thank you very much!
>
> This is my last mail on this ML until you keep on "perpetrating bogus
> ideas" (sic). See you on the motu-council thread.
>
> Cheers,
> Lionel
>
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20080212/acaf2bce/attachment.html>