[MPlayer-cvslog] CVS: main/etc example.conf,1.68,1.69

[Diego Biurrun]

On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:29:44PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 02:20:59PM +0200, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
> > What the hell are you doing?
> > You have 4 commits in a row for a same file and you make 2 times
> > cosmetic changes and 2 times clarify same things. All of them for less
> > than hour?
> > 
> > Are you going to commit contest or something?
> 
> Feel free to send your flames straight to /dev/null.
> 
> Within that hour I have probably made more commits than you during all
> of 2005.  This should speak volumes.  If all you do is flame, better do
> nothing and shut up.  I'm serious.

Ivan, I really don't want to enter into (another) flamefest here, but I
think I have to put you in your place.

Some comments on what I did and what you wrote:

* I have made 6 commits, not 4 in a row.  Have you bothered to look at
  them?  It does not seem to be the case since you did not even get the
  number right..
    - If you haven't looked at them why have you flamed?

* I have used the same commit message twice ("Improve option
  descriptions"), but I have not clarified the same things in both
  commits.  This is obvious from the diffs, so I gather you have not
  bothered to look at them.

* I always try to break commits up into small logical changes.  The goal
  is to make things easy to review.  Maybe I'm overdoing this for
  something as simple as the example configuration file, but is that a
  reason to flame?

* I made some cosmetic commits, but they were strictly separated from
  the functional changes.  Our CVS policy allows this.  Besides, this is
  documentation, cosmetics have always been handled more liberally in
  this area.  On top of that, the order of settings in a configuration
  file is not completely arbitrary.  It makes sense to group them
  together into logical units.  What exactly are you flaming me for?

* I have worked on the configuration file for an hour and a half or so.
  I have looked at it due to the Debian/Marillat situation and fixed a
  few things I had planned to fix for some time.  While I was at it, I
  noticed some more things that could be improved, so I did that.  Not a
  reason to get flamed in my book..

If you have issues with some of my commits, I'll be the last person not
to accept criticism.  If you feel I should have done this all in one big
commit I'll even accept a (civil) discussion about this.  However, I
will not accept flames, much less if they are as senseless and plain
wrong as yours.

Ivan, I'm getting tired, tired, tired of your behavior.  Get a grip on
your attitude *for good*.  I have written this long mail now and I hope
it was not in vain.

One more thing: This is a completely volunteer project and you are free
to work on it as much or as little as you like.  But it's also a
meritocracy, so flaming an active developer as an inactive developer is
- you get the idea...  Notice how much - or rather little - the active
developers flame.  Coincidence?

You should really learn to write emails with a cooler head.  I know this
applies to me as well, but I'm afraid that diplomatic ways are not
having any effect to speak of on you.  So maybe I'm going somewhat over
the top now, but you simply had it coming.

Now, can we *please* stop wasting time with flamage and go back to
committing instead?

Diego