Some people on mailing list (most notably Paul Johnson)don't get that forum works different. Please block their replies or remove them completely from the ML and forum.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 24 March 2008 03:48:31 pm vitamin wrote:> Some people on mailing list (most notably Paul Johnson)don't get that forum > works different. Please block their replies or remove them completely from > the ML and forum.Perhaps it's best to fix the problem instead of suggesting the users are wrong. A lot of the complaints with the forum to list gateway would go away if the forums required quoting, and the gateway itself provided an accurate References header. It's not impossible to get this right: Non-usenet Google Groups are great exmaples of forums working with mailing lists harmoniously. Why the prevailing opinion here is to ban or run off anybody who suggests that fixing a pervasive bug is the right thing to do only serves to harm the project. - -- Paul Johnson baloo at ursine.ca -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH6DdpUCxPKZafKh0RAkj+AJ4iWiakfzLIu2KJ4exV9dey9pD/5wCeLmoz HrC2oah7U+xQkxmLnsz2u7k=IXpo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Paul and I have been discussing his behavior offline. He has already been warned. Vitamin (and everyone else), please do not create threads to complain about other users. If you have a complaint, please private message me. In your complaint, link to the threads where the offense took place. Banning Policy will be as follows: A valid complaint filed will result in a warning. A second complaint in 30 days will result in a 30 day ban. After your month, if another complaint is filed against you, you will receive a permanent ban. As far as the breaking of threads goes, I will look into it. I don't want to see anymore complaints to forum users about it. It is not their fault. If you want to complain to someone, complain to me.
> On Monday 24 March 2008 16:21:06 pm Paul Johnson wrote: >> On Monday 24 March 2008 03:48:31 pm vitamin wrote: >> Some people on mailing list (most notably Paul Johnson)don't get that forum >> works different. Please block their replies or remove them completely from >> the ML and forum. > > Perhaps it's best to fix the problem instead of suggesting the users are > wrong. A lot of the complaints with the forum to list gateway would go away > if the forums required quoting, and the gateway itself provided an accurate > References header. > > It's not impossible to get this right: Non-usenet Google Groups are great > exmaples of forums working with mailing lists harmoniously. Why the > prevailing opinion here is to ban or run off anybody who suggests that fixing > a pervasive bug is the right thing to do only serves to harm the project. >We use mail2forum (www.mail2forum.com) and phpbb2, and patches and/or advice are welcome. The mail2forum guys are openly asking for additional developers, and I think we've deployed from source, so patches or configuration advice would be helpful. For phpbb, I know that Jeremy would be more reluctant to take patches, as he's using Debian packages, but perhaps he's overlooked a setting; again, advice is appreciated. Cheers, Jeremy
Paul Johnson wrote:> Let's make sure the From: line problem and the quoting problem is also fixed while we're at it, please.My understanding is the generic email used by forums cannot easily be fixed. Mailman expect the email used to be a subscriber in order to post. The forum posts to mailman using a generic email to get by this limitation. One way around this would to make some kind of mechanism that subscribes each forum poster to mailman. This is a can of worms that is not worth the effort IMO. The quoting thing I will check into. I imagine it might already be fixed in the mail2forum tip, as I'm sure other boards have run into the same issue.
vitamin skrev:> Some people on mailing list (most notably Paul Johnson)don't get that forum works different.If we're going to point fingers anyway, I suggest banning someone called "vitamin" from the forums. From what I've seen of his conduct so far, he's arrogant, rude to newbies and experienced people alike, confrontational and likes to flame people, and also fairly ignorant and have many times spread incorrect information about Linux and Wine, while in a condescending manner pretended they're facts. He shouldn't be allowed to keep going like this. So is your opinion then that this kind of behaviour is how forums should work? If so, then these forums really *are* a bad idea.
Ove Kaaven wrote:> have many times spread incorrect information about Linux and WineFacts please!
Then what do you suggest? "wrong" and "good" information are just two points of view. When you let the community support the community, you are also allowing them to help and provide support by their own experience on the matter, and if not experience, theories. Select some people then, people who will give "good" information, I dunno, an "official WINE developer" rank or something, amongst the sea of other people who isn't an "official WINE developer" and as such, the source where that information is being provided isn't to be considered very trustworthy. <sarcasm> While we're at it, we can also ban everyone and let this fuss dissapear into the byte realm. You all suck, nobody uses the forums, I post in RTF format because I don't use any text client, so ban me, ban you, ban all. </sarcasm> Seriously, it's been kinda stormy in the mailing list recently, for random reasons, random outbursts of anger from random people. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Ove Kaaven <ovek at arcticnet.no> wrote: > vitamin skrev: > > > Ove Kaaven wrote: > >> have many times spread incorrect information about Linux and Wine > > > > Facts please! > > OK. I didn't really plan a flamewar, I'm just making a "don't throw > stones unless you're sinless" point, and I don't really want to continue > this thread, but since I should probably back this thing up anyway, if > only for informational purposes, here's a couple of examples I've seen > (and I don't read everything). (I'm only including examples of > misinformation here, not of hostile and unhelpful attitude; finding that > is left as an exercise for the reader.) > > http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-users/2008-March/029381.html > > The Linux equivalent of a named pipe is called a Unix domain socket, and > VMware will happily create those on Linux (and I doubt VMware can create > a hardware comm port outside of the VM). There's no technical reason > Wine couldn't connect to a Unix socket, if someone wrote the necessary code. > > http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-users/2008-March/029640.html > http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-users/2008-March/029709.html > > That seems to be a misunderstanding of the (L)GPL licenses. They only > apply if you *distribute* binaries. You can modify LGPL code, but you > don't have to distribute your modifications unless you distribute your > binaries to someone else. And then you only need to distribute the > source to them, not to everyone. For personal/internal use, you can keep > your modifications secret. > > http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-users/2008-March/030870.html > > It's not "simple as that". Developing a version of Wine that runs on > Windows (using cygwin, for instance) isn't trivial, but should be > possible, could be useful, and some effort has already been put into it > in the past. There's no reason to shoot down the suggested project, if > he/she really wants to work on it. > > > And as I said, I don't plan to continue this thread. I don't really care > about this stuff, it's sins of the past. As long as things improve in > the future, and this guy learns to be a little more humble... > > > >