On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Ben Bleything <ben / bleything.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Aaron Turner <synfinatic / gmail.com> wrote:
>> I am saying that clearly Jim is aware of the problem (he already
>> committed the fix right?) so why the public spectacle/fear-mongering
>> that the world is going to end unless Jim acts now? Based on the OP
>> this sounded like a huge coding effort, not something any user could
>> fix in 30seconds if it actually bit them.
>
> Did you read the blog post Aaron linked to in his original post
> wherein he describes how the work is already done and he's just trying
> to give Jim an incentive to release it?   
Honestly, my initial reaction came is based on Aaron's original email
and then the later realization this was all about removing 5 lines.
Rather then realizing the joke, it screamed "WTF?"

Looking back, and re-reading it a bit more carefully it would appear I
missed the tongue 'n cheek tone that Aaron intended.  Partly my fault
for not giving Aaron the benefit of a doubt.

The fear-mongering part was it's horribly broken and nobody can fix it
but Jim and clearly he's not doing anything bit (otherwise you
wouldn't need this campaign), which turned out to be a far cry from
the truth.

>> Basically this hit a pet peeve of mine how lately users of open source
>> software seem to becoming more and more demanding of developers.  >> this NOW!         >> I don't care if you have a life, my project is a priority!
>
> I don't know the details, so Aaron can describe if he wants, but I
> believe that this whole thing is sort of gentle ribbing among internet
> e-friends.  §     ɧ > number of times and a postcard campaign seems like exactly the kind of
> thing he would enjoy.

After more info came to light, that would seem to be the case.  I
think part of the problem is not all the subscribers to this list is
"in" on the joke/Jim's idea of funny/cool.

> Regardless, I guess my point is ultimately this: triggering a pet
> peeve is not sufficient reason to dump on someone's idea, particularly
> when it's not going to impact you in any way.   
> participate, don't.       > "hey, cut the guy some slack, maintaining projects is hard work" than
> to be dismissive.

If you look back in the thread, I think it's fair to say that's about
where I started.   It wasn't until someone basically asked, "Well what
else are we supposed to do...  fork the code?" that things went
quickly down hill.

Anyways, apologies for over-reacting (my bad), but in the future I'd
suggest people remember that large public mailing lists like this
aren't always the best place to execute semi-inside jokes without
making things really crystal clear.  Eric mentioned that Jim suggested
such a letter campaign in jest, but somehow this info was missing from
the OP.

-- 
Aaron Turner
http://synfin.net/
http://tcpreplay.synfin.net/ - Pcap editing and replay tools for Unix & Windows
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
    -- Benjamin Franklin