Subject: Re: Proposal for new Git Wiki admin

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 19:16:43 +0530

Hi Felipe,

Felipe Contreras writes:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Michael J Gruber
> <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > +1 on Jakub and Ram because they showed restraint in the pertaining
> > thread. We need moderators, not radiators ;)
> 
> Ok, I was going to let go what happened, but you are calling me a
> radiator. So here's what happened
[...]

Can I personally kneel down before you and *beg* you to let this go?

I'm nobody- both you and Johannes have contributed far more to git.git
than me. However, seeing you fight like this makes me sad. I don't see
why I should be biased against either "Johannes", "Jakub", or "Felipe"
- they're just random names to me. From what I've seen, using my best
unbiased judgement, you're definitely over-reacting; to the extent
that I'm almost convinced you have something against Johannes
personally. Please, please stop- the list is no place for this. We can
all write SO much good code and solve the world's hunger problems
instead of squabbling like this.

We're not ignoring anything. We have come to a solution together,
voted for it, and are solving it now- Jakub and I will work with (or
"to check" if you prefer that) Johannes. Personally, I don't think you
should work with Johannes, atleast in the state in which you're in
right now. Please disagree only if you feel that Jakub or I will do a
bad job.

Can you please stop digging up old graves and let Johannes be now?
Can you trust that we understand the full magnitude of the problem and
will do our best to prevent it from happening again?

For the record, I have no interest in admin priviliges- I'm only
stepping up temporarily until everyone calms down. After that, I'll
drop my priviliges and we can just have Jakub and Johannes moderating
the wiki.

> 7) At this point it was clear to me that Johannes had too much power
> over the wiki, being the only admin, and that was specially worrying
> since he had so low tolerance to accepting mistakes, therefore, on Aug
> 10 I started a new thread asking for a new (as in extra) maintainer,
> and one of the arguments was his misbehavior.
> 
> Note: I consider raising a flag when there are problems to be a good thing.

Yes, this is all very good. We got some suggestions, and we're working
towards solving the problem. Are we not doing it fast enough?

> 8) The same day Johannes accepted he made a mistake, and silently
> unblocked Amir with the message "I overreacted and am sorry". He never
> accepted any wrongdoing on the mailing list, nor expressed any desire
> in doing anything to avoid these issues in the future.

Remind me why *you* have a problem with Johannes not writing a public
apology note? He did whatever was needed to be done to solve the
issue. Amir is happy, Johannes is happy, and nobody is fighting
anymore. Why are you pressing on the issue of whether Johannes
realizes his mistake or not? Whether or not he does, we'll be working
with him- so he won't have a chance to "misbehave" again. I don't
understand what you want from him.

Johannes: If Felipe still keeps insisting on a public apology, please
oblige and get it over with.

> What we need is people that resolve the conflicts, not ignore them.

How are we ignoring anything? We've called a vote. By virtue of having
more votes than you, Jakub and I will step up if nobody has further
objections. This matter is closed unless someone does.

-- Ram