Bug#744249: libgtk-3-0: gtk 3.12 breaks usability by forcing client side decorations on X11

Fri Oct 10 17:59:56 UTC 2014

On Fri, 2014-10-10 at 18:51 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: 
> please see this as an advance warning.
Uhm... guess I see it more as trying to oppress freedom speech
Michael, I do understand that you have a short fuse recently, since
you're involved in so many packages that do get quite heavily attacked
in discussions... sometimes justified, sometimes not...

But if you now start threatening to "silence" people, just because they
don't like you're (or other's) ideas than a quite concerning step has
been reached.

> If you don't stop this behaviour
> of constantly attacking the GNOME upstream
Well I guess if one breaks existing systems or usage scenarios, people
complain about this but regardless one continues with that... it's no
big surprise that the affected people get upset, is it?

And I mean this bug isn't about bashing GNOME, people were using some
GTK+ applications for years, and now they are pretty broken when used
from outside of GNOME, and all others basically have to deal with this.
All this isn't just "random accusations" as you claim here, just look at
the mailing lists/bug trackers of KDE, mate, Cinnamon... they all
have/had to deal with what GNOME usually unilaterally decides without
taking any regard on others.

I further don't think that the CoC forbids people to discuss political
issues, so why do my comments about "whether GNOME should be allowed to
remain part of Debian [if the light of the above problems]" should
"attack" upstream or the Debian Maintainers.
It's not more or less than any other difficult or controversial issues
like the benefits/disadvantages of systemd (and note that I'm in favour
of it), or whether we should have non-free, or how to deal with issues
when e.g. Mozilla adds DRM to FF.

Also you can't seriously claim I'd be the only one who is negatively
affected by the recent developments of GNOME and who tries to deal with
it (and you should perhaps note, that nobody here forced to get rid of
CSDs, people just asked for a way to optionally don't use them - which
is just the contrary behaviour of GNOME which forces it on all others).

Also we've had many controversies about GNOME in the past, the tech-ctte
ruling on NM, recently whether it should be the default DE or not, and
so on.
So as I've said, it's for sure not just me who has concerns.

Anyway, long story short,... I didn't offend any of GNOME upstream
personally, I just said I don't like the ways they go.
Arguably, I used the term "GNOME mafia", but put a smiley next to it,
which should make clear to everyone that it's meant jokingly.
I'd assume many people makes similar jokes, like in systemd it's not so
uncommon that even advocates of it "jokes" about Lennart, even himself
does as e.g. here
(https://plus.google.com/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly/posts/VUzeRLf5g5m).

>  and Debian team
I can't remember of directly offending the Debian team.
And even if, I guess it's a difference of "offending" someone, and just
not agreeing with him.

Anyway I see that at some point we two must have started off at a wrong
foot,... I don't know why, maybe I said something wrong or you
misinterpreted it,... may you just don't like the kind of issues I
report (like all the issues I have with NM), nevertheless, even if you
don't like to work on this issues (and of course you have no
obligation), I'd guess that 99,9% of them are very real and it's
therefore good to have them in the BTS.
But I still can't see why you pick now exactly me trying to silence him.

> and spouting
> random accusations sprinkled with imaginary conspiracy theories
Wich conspiracy theories?
I thought it was well known that GNOME tries to be more self-contained,
less taking regard on others (e.g. non-Linuxes, due to them not
supporting systemd), there are the plans of GNOME OS, and so on.

So nothing of this is just random theories o.O

If the CoC actually forbids discussing about that, and how it (possibly
negatively) affects Debian and or it's users... then the CoC might be a
problem itself.
And I seriously doubt that I'm the only one who has strong opinions and
also phrases them as that - actually I think you're not much different,
at least when looking back at the lengthy threads about the init system
debate (even though I mostly agreed there with your points).

> I'm
> going to report this to the bts and list maintainers and ask for a ban,
> as this is clearly in violation of our CoC.
> 
> I've CCed them here so they are aware of this issue.
So actually it turns it's not just a warning as you've claimed before,
just that you didn't formally ask them to ban me.

I feel really sad that you seem to have a problem with me, especially
since you (co-)maintain many packages which have influence on me (GNOME,
NM) or which strongly interest me (systemd)... but OTOH I don't see how
to change this,... apparently we simply have different philosophies in
some fields.
Nevertheless, it's still a bit strange that you pick and report me now
out from a bug, where you even didn't contribute before or shared your
opinions or whatever.
Honi soit qui mal y pense - but it seems a bit as if you'd have just
waited for such opportunity.

Anyway, since you've now already brought this up to the "formal
authorities", and since I don't like the idea of having to alter my
opinions and views in anticipatory obedience, just because you threaten
to report me, I would ask the listmasters and BTS maintainers to not
wait for the next opportunity when Michael doesn't like any of my views
or contributions to Debian in form of bug reports of list discussions
and immediately check whether I should be expelled from Debian.

I guess I've made many bug reports and contributions to the lists,
especially when it goes about security where I actually have very strong
opinions (all towards "security first")... most of the time there were
also other people agreeing with me, and in most cases of bug reports I
think I just normally cooperate with the respective maintainers and so
far the majority seemed to have welcomed my reports.

My posts and bugs should be easy to find, mostly with
calestyo at scientia.net, but sometimes I might have accidentally used one
of these addresses:
mail at christoph.anton.mitterer.name
calestyo at gmail.com
christoph.anton.mitterer at lmu.de
christoph.anton.mitterer at physik.uni-muenchen.de

For controversies between me and Michael, I guess the reports for NM
packages would be the ones applying the most.

Oh and if you should actually feel that Michael is right and Debian is
better off with me being expelled, then please also tell me whether this
is permanently or whatever.

Cheers,
Chris.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5313 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20141010/77a16c73/attachment-0001.bin>