[MPlayer-dev-eng] uau - svn account removal

[Ivan Kalvachev]

2007/2/27, Attila Kinali <attila at kinali.ch>:
> Moin,
>
> I created quite a mess here which i should not have
> done. And i want to appologize to everyone, especialy to uau
> for this.
>
> IMHO, because this vote should have never been started
> and because i think that Dominiks patches fix the issue
> at hand i thought that i should cancel the whole voting
> thing and let it be. But unfortunately, even this wouldnt
> be a clean way out of it as some people expect that i publish
> the votes i collected and someone is even threatening with leaving
> the project.
>
> Well, it's my fault and i have to clean up somehow.
>
> For the results, i counted 11 votes (from Oded, Dominik, Ivo, Michael,
> Nico, Guillaume, Rich, Luca, Roberto, Compn and Ivan) with:
>
> 1 Yes
> 4 No
> 6 Conditional No
>
> Which means that uau's account should be kept under the conditon
> that the svn commits are fixed up.

If you read again you'll see that at least 4 of the conditional votes
(dalias,  poirierg, lu_zero, michaelni) are saying that  uau must
revert it's work until 2007 Feb 27 00:00 +0000. That date have passed
so the condition failed and should be counted as YES. I'm sure other
conditional votes and even some of the NOes (rxt, nicodvb, Rathann)
include similar requirement.

The svn is not fixed yet and uau has not given any sign he is going to do it.

> As Dominik is already working on this we can for the moment
> refrain from disabling uau's account IMHO. I think that uau
> learned something from this and thus will not repeat the same
> mistakes again.... And neither will I.

I'm afraid you are completely missing the point, as does Diego.
It's not (only) about the commit or the history, it's about uau
refusing to fix his own mess.

You probably won't understand me, but I'll try anyway.

Diego tried to give example with Reimar, but Reimar did fix the
"example" issue even when we all knew it was not necessary.

Just few days before the whole mess Reimar did broke the rules for
real, committing over code I maintain. Not only I had disagreed of the
changes the day before (it introduced unnecessary changes), but it
also had hidden bug. I requested revert without giving any extra
explanations (not even about the bug).
And Reimar DID revert it the very same day.  Then I gave explanation
and he agreed with me. The proper version I had committed proved my
case.
Case closed. MPlayer survived.


And what did uau made when 4 developers including Michael asked him to
revert? He ignored their arguments and went on fixing the bugs he had
caused, committing more and more stuff over the first one.

To very this moment - 6 days after the first commit, other people are
working to fix the whole mess,  creating patches, hacking repository
and whatnot. What is uau doing?
Committing more stuff in mplayer.c of course.

You said uau had learned something from this. I wonder what it is...

> I hope we can now close this whole issue once for all.
>
> Thanks for your patience with me
>
>                         Attila Kinali
>
> PS: Just for the record, as it still seems to be not clear
> enough for a few people: root does not have any right to decide
> anything on its own unless its something that might compromise
> the security of the machine in question or an pure implementation
> question of the system. Anything else, like who gets an svn account
> and who not is the responsibility of the developers team and not of root.

Indeed. These things are to be decided by MPlayer Project Leader and
at the moment we don't have one.

There is one more issue. I just asked Diego if FFmpeg and MPlayer svn
developers lists are separated and he said they are not separated in
the moment but they could be.
I'm sure Michael have the authority as FFmpeg Project Leader to
request keeping uau away from ffmpeg svn.