July 26, 2017 9:37 AM, "Ivan J." <parazyd@???> wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, nextime@??? wrote:
>
>> July 26, 2017 9:20 AM, "Ivan J." <parazyd@???> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, nextime@??? wrote:
>>
>> July 26, 2017 9:09 AM, "Jaromil" <jaromil@???> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Ivan J. wrote:
>>
>> And please nextime, I know you've been away, but please take the
>> time to understand all of this (as you have mentioned you will do)
>> and try not to push stuff before that.
>>
>> I think this way to come back without considering all the work done by
>> "new" volunteers and imposing a conservative approach on improvements
>> is a serious show-stopper for many people who are working on Devuan.
>> Without them we cannot go forward, nextime and daniel you cannot go
>> forward like this. You are now being very dangerous to the
>> project. Please take responsibility of your leadership, Devuan has to
>> grow, not shrink around you. I'm very serious about this and Nextime
>> you need to consider the fact we haven't talked at all about this and
>> you have been away all this time.
>>
>> Many improvements on Devuan's have been blocked for ages because of
>> lack of permissions and lack of availability. This is not the way to
>> respond to volunteers working around problems right now.
>>
>> ciao
>>
>> Please Jaromil, don't go in this path, it's not about to be conservative or to stop anything,
>> nor it's anything to get things around me or daniel: it's just a technical point of view: i really
>> think that
>> using scorch is the wrong path and that it's easier, faster and better to just improve releasebot
>> in the actual
>> infrastructure. Just that, no politics, no polemics, nothing more.
>>
>> Then enjoy and see how far the two of you can get further.
>>
>> Besides migrating the Gitlab to a bare metal machine, has ANY actual
>> progress been done for the past few months?
>>
>> Has any of it been documented?
>>
>> Is there an overview of the Devuan infrastructure status?
>>
>> Parazyd, if we would like to argument things by technical and constructive opinions i'm in,
>> but this way to argument isn't something i'm interested to follow.
>>
>> Make no sense to talk about what "two of us" can achieve, we aren't two. Make no sense to talk for
>> the
>> last few months when you know that i was not here last few months.
>
> Yes, and exactly for that reason of you not being here, and Daniel not
> being around so often we decided to take the matters into our own hands.
> We made significant improvements that are ready to be included and
> nobody is taking care of that. We did our part on the new server as
> well, and it's now sitting there idling because the person(s) assigned
> to continue the work are not touching it at all. Dyne/Devuan is throwing
> money down the drain because of this as well and is not something I'm
> very fond of.

Are we talking about releasebot and the things that have to be improved on it or are we talking about anything else?

I don't see why you mention all those things, i have said anything against that or i have not recognized enough the great
work you all are doing and have done?

I'm talking only about the improvements needed in the releasebot part and how to achieve them, not about anything else.

>> lt's talk about what we all we can achieve togheter, let's talk about what to do in the next few
>> months.
>
> In the next few months we should already have things in place. All that
> we want to do can be done in a matter of days, a week at max.

Same the improvements discussed in releasebot, are matter of days.

>> Documentation on the infrastructure is lacking? yes, you right, let's start, togheter, to document
>> it then.
>
> The way you made the infrastructure from the start has disallowed us to
> gain any understanding of it, so unless you and Daniel are willing to
> lead us through, then you will have to write the documentation on your
> own.

I'm back here (also) for that.

>> releasebot needs improvement? let's do that then. But don't try to impose something to all just by
>> saying things like
>> what you are saying here in *this* email, if you really think that your path is the right one,
>> argument for that, persuade me that i'm wrong and you are right, at the moment i think it isn't the
>> right path and all the goals that needs to be reached by releasebot i think that they are better
>> developed by improving it as it is than by adding other things in the path.
>
> I do think our way is the right to do it, and we have come up with an
> RFC document which you are supposed to read and say what you like and do
> not like. Then we improve it if possible, or ditch it if not possible.

I already readed it and i will soon comment about what i think needs to be changed.

> All the arguments are there and the document should speak for itself.
>
> --
> ~ parazyd
> GnuPG: 03337671FDE75BB6A85EC91FB876CB44FA1B0274
> GnuPG: https://parazyd.cf/FA1B0274.asc
>
> _______________________________________________
> devuan-dev internal mailing list
> devuan-dev@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devuan-dev