[ANN] msn-pecan-0.1.1 released
felipe.contreras at gmail.com
Sun Aug 29 12:13:06 EDT 2010
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Chris Forsythe <chris at growl.info> wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2010, at 5:45 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> I'm not sure if you intended to send this email to all the mailing
> I did. I'm tired of your crap, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one. If I was, I would expect 15 people to reply to me to tell me to shut the hell up. But the fact is that on irc someone said "The_Tick++" almost immediately after they read my reply, and in my inbox is an email stating that almost all of the pidgin devs send your emails to the trash by filter rule, I can only figure that you're trying to use these lists as either recruitment, are trying to be intentionally annoying, or just don't know any better.
I don't care about what "most pidgin devs" or you think, msn-pecan is
an important project in both communities and many people are
interested on it even if most of them haven't been blessed by the
"official" dev sword. So you say some people +1 you on IRC, well, I
haven't seen any reply _here_ on your vile commentary. If you have a
concrete proposal I haven't seen anyone chiming in either.
> Since I know I've said before to stop sending the drivel about how you got emotional about how you were treated by the pidgin devs treated you, and I remember (someone correct me if I'm wrong) you saying you would stop it. You haven't. You've definitely made it shorter, but it's gone. I honestly don't care too much about msn-pecan either way, but I do care about seeing crap, and this is crap.
There's no drivel, all that was said was a fact. We can start a
separate discussion about the evidence behind the claim, but I don't
think anybody is interested. If you are, we can have a private
discussion, if not, then keep your unfounded judgement calls to
Again, if you don't like hearing the truth, just ignore it.
>> but now that you did, I feel compelled to reply the same way.
>> On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Chris Forsythe <chris at growl.info> wrote:
>>> On Aug 28, 2010, at 12:31 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>>> msn-pecan is a "fork" of libpurple's MSN plug-in in the same sense
>>>> that MariaDB is a fork of MySQL; the former comes from the original
>>>> author(s) due to the inability to contribute as wanted on the later.
>>> Was this portion really necessary? You've been told numerous times to stop, and while this is much better than previous emails, this whole paragraph could have been removed and no value would have been lost in this email. You don't even start the email out with what the email is about, you just go into the whole rehashing of why msn-pecan exists. I get it, you don't like something, but get over it. You have something good going here, but it's tainted by the continued perceived hatred you are eschewing. Please discontinue this practice, it's simply annoying and childish at this point.
>> Many projects start their release announcements by explaining what the
>> project is. I'm simply doing the same.
> No you aren't. Those announcements do not get spammed to other mailing lists, they usually just go to the relevant project's mailing list.
There are many counter-examples; e.g. git and util-linux-ng are
announced in LKML along their respective list.
>> If you want me to change that text I would like to hear a proposal
>> that achieves the same thing:
>> 1) Explains with clarity with the "fork" was stated
>> 2) Points out the obvious biggest advantage of using this code
>> Now, I'm not spreading any hatred, I'm merely stating the truth. I am
>> overwhelmingly the main author of libpurple's code, and I've provided
>> evidence to back that up. It seems to me that you just don't like to
>> hear that fact.
>> How about this:
>> msn-pecan is an own-code fork of libpurple's msn that goes beyond
>> libpurple, for a comparison see.
>>  http://code.google.com/p/msn-pecan/
> This is not my point. You are not getting it.
> There is simply no need to even bring that up, period. If someone wants to know the history behind a project, they simply google that project, and find the about page talking about that project. You decide to type a new "introduction" every time you send this out, when everyone on these lists already know what it is, and most of the people on the lists that I talk to are really just annoyed by you continuing it. It needs to stop Felipe, how do we get you to stop sending this portion of your announcements, or even your announcements, to these lists?
Ok, so your are not only objecting to the rhetoric, you are objecting
to msn-pecan being introduced at all in the announcements, and even
the announcements themselves?
First, there's new people joining the mailing list(s) all the time; a
short introduction benefits them.
Anyway, if somebody is spreading hatred here it seems to be you. How
about you list a concrete set of proposals for people to comment on?
That would be constructive.
>>> I'd unsubscribe from your emails, but I simply cannot. I like being on the adium development list, I don't like seeing things like this though. Can you please stop sending this sort of thing, and just keep your release notices informational about the actual changes/improvements/project progress? I think that'd make life easier for people who are interested in your project.
>> So you don't want to receive these mails because of a one line
>> introduction? You can't unsubscribe, but you can filter.
> How do you suggest I filter messages when I'll still see replies?
But there are rarely replies to announcements. There wouldn't have
been any on this one if it weren't for you.
> If everyone pretty much filters your emails, isn't it easier to just have you stop sending them, or ban you? Don't read into this, I'm not saying I'm going to ban you. But it would be easier than telling you, repeatedly, to stop sending this garbage. It would also be easier than 30 copies of the same rule in different mail clients.
The vast majority of people subscribed to the list are not "official"
developers. The fact that *you*, or a selected amount of people,
consider this garbage doesn't mean everybody does.
> msn-pecan is not relevant to Adium until it ships with Adium, if it ever does. If msn-pecan were relevant, I could see a "hey guys, I updated msn-pecan, click http://myfancy.url to find out more!" would be great. But it's not the reality of the situation here. msn-pecan doesn't ship with Adium, and likely isn't going to for a while. So why am I still seeing messages from you basically saying "haha, I coded my own because I couldn't get along! I made a fork and I maintain and update it, woohoo!" followed by a list of changes that you mostly make, that I could find with google or by looking at a changelog?
There are many ways in which msn-pecan is related to Adium, including:
there are Adium builds with msn-pecan in it, and there's plan to have
a standalone plug-in for Adium.
>>> Is there an msn-pecan mailing list? If so, maybe these updates are more appropriate there anyhow?
>> The mail is also sent there,
> So why not just keep the release notices there?
Because people in your community are interested on these announcements
and are not interested in subscribing to msn-pecan ml.
>> but msn-pecan has many Adium users as well.
> So then those users would be updated when you email that list. Anyone on the adium or pidgin lists who want updates about msn-pecan can go to your mailing list, subscribe, and get updates.
That's not true; read the previous comment.
This announcement was very short and straight-forward. These come very
rarely, and will probably continue that way until we reach 2.0rc, the
most reasonable thing for you to do was to ignore the mail, and wait
to see if it really becomes a "problem" later on, and my suggestion
for you is to do exactly that unless somebody else chimes in, but I
don't see the point of having a flame war on such a small issue.
More information about the Devel