[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
regexps.com core dump
|
From: |
Tom Lord |
|
Subject: |
regexps.com core dump |
|
Date: |
Fri, 9 Aug 2002 18:03:13 -0700 (PDT) |
I hope people are not offended by the volume or unpleasantness.
Undoubtedly some will be.
Under some circumstances, one must SCREAM, in my opinion.
-t
From: Michael Tiemann <tiemann@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: 09 Aug 2002 15:33:59 -0400
X-UIDL: [XA!!<#^!!$1j"!`BN!!
Tom, the problems you are describing are your problems. If arch is
great, great, I'd be happy to see people use it. But
as I've told you before,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[That is not, in my opinion, a correct representation of past discussions. I
suppose I could look up the old email.]
the responsibility to make arch (or for that matter, yourself)
successful lies with you, not with me nor with Red Hat. It is up to you
alone to figure out what you want to do, what you can do, and how you're
going to do it.
M
On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 15:14, Tom Lord wrote:
>
>
> Finally, sorry for thinking to call your attention to these problems
> so late in the game -- a cry for help is all the hard to evaluate and
> deal with when there's time pressure. Partly, after the failed job
> interview foo, i just habitually decided to stear clear of you for a
> while to let any bad feelings fade away.
>
>
> -t
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
There's plenty more in the thread from me....i think this is the gist.
-t
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:43:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
Thank you for replying.
PLEASE, may we continue the conversation a little bit further, to be
sure that I am not misunderstanding you and vice versa? If you are
impatient, search for "May we focus on the positives" below.
You seem to be scolding me by mapping this issue to a simple case of
responsibility and seem to be implying:
1) i am asking you to put my needs ahead of your responsibilities
2) i have shirked my own responsibilities and am counting on
someone else to catch me in a trust fall
3) i am demanding that you offer me charity
4) i have behaved irresponsibility
5) this financial mess is entirely of my own creation and i
get whatever i deserve
To the extent that those were accurate descriptions, I would
sympathise with the position you are taking.
However, those five points and lots of variations on them are, as
nearly as I can tell, after doing _much_ soul searching, hard work,
self criticism, consultation with friends etc --- those points are
simultaneously:
a) more or less how, i am painfully aware, this must look
from your and others perspective unless you look into it
very carefully.
b) most definately not a very good description of what's going
on, what has passed between us in the past, or what i'm
asking of you now.
There are many, many perspectives one could take on my situation and
arch. Relating it to, for example, a chain of events in my
professional career that started at Cygnus --- but also relating it to
some other problems. One must always take responsibility -- but one
can never prevent bogus things from occurring anyway.
In my view, while i am far from perfect, a lot of this problem arose
because of an accumulation of bogosities beyond my control. I realize
that sounds pathetic -- I've done nearly everything I think I can to
make it not be so. We are from similar backgrounds with regards to
"responsibility", I think. I think you know how terrible I feel
having wound up having _this_ conversation.
May we focus on the positive?
i) I have initiated several technology projects that i am
personally certain are good for the free software world,
the free software business world, and eventually (and
potentially _soon_) for Red Hat. I admit to being shocked
and disappointed at the casual and ineffective manner in
which you tell me you evaluated arch when it first came up.
Arch has been given the brush off by some people without
any good reason and you seem to have uncritically accepted
their words. Please let's *you and i* evaluate this
technology together, so that you can form *your own*
opinion. If you have questions, concerns, or skepticism
about it, I'd like to try to answer those directly,
engineer to engineer. Ok?
ii) I can and wish to continue to contribute to these and
other efforts and, though my financial needs are far from
obscene, I can not do it with the level of support I am
able to muster from anonymous strangers on the net.
Indeed, I can not emphasize enough how imminent the
problem is (nor how easily the most immediate problems can
be dispelled -- buying at least a few more days of
thinking time --- << $1,000 is due on monday).
iii) I am not a financials or business culture expert, but
from everything I have seen, you have access to many and
authority over some resources which are orders of
magnitude larger than any kind of help I need.
Meanwhile, I'm working on technology that, I am about as
certain as I can be, fits and advances the charter of
those resources. You are a good choice here in no small
part because your helping me would _not_ be charitable,
but rather in our mutual best interests.
-t
From: Michael Tiemann <tiemann@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: 09 Aug 2002 15:33:59 -0400
X-UIDL: [XA!!<#^!!$1j"!`BN!!
Tom, the problems you are describing are your problems. If arch is
great, great, I'd be happy to see people use it. But as I've told you
before, the responsibility to make arch (or for that matter, yourself)
successful lies with you, not with me nor with Red Hat. It is up to you
alone to figure out what you want to do, what you can do, and how you're
going to do it.
M
On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 15:14, Tom Lord wrote:
>
>
> Finally, sorry for thinking to call your attention to these problems
> so late in the game -- a cry for help is all the hard to evaluate and
> deal with when there's time pressure. Partly, after the failed job
> interview foo, i just habitually decided to stear clear of you for a
> while to let any bad feelings fade away.
>
>
> -t
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:47:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
cc: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092143.OAA00977@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:43:36 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
X-UIDL: k0C!!Hi+!!l7H!!<WK"!
i) I have initiated several technology projects that i am
personally certain are good for the free software world,
the free software business world, and eventually (and
potentially _soon_) for Red Hat.
For our CC friend I should add:
also good for projects such as GCC
I don't know how or if it might be relevent to codesourcery apart from
that, though.
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
cc: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092143.OAA00977@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:43:36 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
X-UIDL: %(:!!j<I!!I~L!!N>B"!
One more correction:
Please let's *you and i* evaluate this technology together
There are three of us here, so that's "you" (pl).
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:51:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
cc: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092143.OAA00977@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:43:36 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
X-UIDL: X~Y!!@pH!!`gS!!HJp"!
> One more correction:
> Please let's *you and i* evaluate this technology together
> There are three of us here, so that's "you" (pl).
Michael,
You earlier conveyed a concern that arch had the alleged problem of
being mostly shell scripts.
Can you explain why that should be a problem?
FWIW, most of the performance critical workhorse-components of arch
(such as `diff', `patch', `tar', and `inventory') are already in C.
An objection that the rest is shell scripts seems groundless.
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:52:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092350.QAA01614@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:50:08 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
And, no --- this is not some kind of veiled legal threat (or any other
kind).
I've been on the receiving end of many, many of those -- glibbly
dished out, especially by managers and execs.
Personally, I do my best to avoid that sort of shit.
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-dev mailing list
arch-dev@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-dev
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:53:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092350.QAA01614@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:50:08 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
> And, no --- this is not some kind of veiled legal threat (or any other
> kind).
And if you doubt that, I've little doubt that you have the means to
investigate and confirm that I am certainly in no position to issue
any such threat, even if I wanted to.
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092147.OAA00992@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 14:47:30 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
Finally, may I conclude (unless you want to have the _good_
discussion) by saying that, on the face of it, from the array of facts
I have at this end, there are pretty much _two_ interpretations of
your note:
1) You have expressed the gravity that you feel must
be applicable to this situation to justify the "stunts"
I've pulled to obtain your attention. I think I replied
by affirming that.
2) You have badly abused precious words which express some
of the highest values some of us hold, in order to prepare
a statement which grants you some level of immunity in
public opinion and perhaps the law. Until I die, it is
unlikely I will assume that this is the case, yet I think
the gravity of the situation demands that I point out this
interpretation. Clear?
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:52:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092350.QAA01614@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:50:08 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
And, no --- this is not some kind of veiled legal threat (or any other
kind).
I've been on the receiving end of many, many of those -- glibbly
dished out, especially by managers and execs.
Personally, I do my best to avoid that sort of shit.
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:55:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092352.QAA01634@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:52:47 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
X-UIDL: k]!#!Ki:"!iSA"!R7%!!
> I've been on the receiving end of many, many of those -- glibbly
> dished out, especially by managers and execs.
Including at least two from your offices, by the way.
They come across as if you said "Call us when you stop beating your
wife."
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
------- Start of forwarded message -------
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:57:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: tiemann@redhat.com
CC: mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208092353.QAA01638@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 16:53:37 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: very old thread and the regexps.com problems
X-UIDL: G0O!!^2]"!^H+!!9C8"!
Oh ... and, should you investigate .... beyond the legal threats, the
illegal and impossible to prove threats of physical violence are also
a problem (not something I associate with either of you in particular
- -- but yes, something i've experienced *on the job*).
- -t
------- End of forwarded message -------
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: arch-users@regexps.com
CC: tiemann@redhat.com, mark@codesourcery.com
In-reply-to: <200208100005.RAA01786@morrowfield.regexps.com> (message from Tom
Lord on Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:05:46 -0700 (PDT))
Subject: Re: [arch-users] [lord@regexps.com: Re: very old thread and the
regexps.com problems]
Sender: arch-users-admin@regexps.com
X-BeenThere: arch-users@regexps.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:arch-users-request@regexps.com?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:arch-users@regexps.com>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users>,
<mailto:arch-users-request@regexps.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: a discussion list for users of arch <arch-users.regexps.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users>,
<mailto:arch-users-request@regexps.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.regexps.com/pipermail/arch-users/>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:21:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-UIDL: #oG!!SKk!!!X>"!$)`!!
In the perpetual struggle against harmful ambiguity:
I wrote:
> the illegal and impossible to prove threats of physical
> violence are also a problem (not something I associate with
> either of you in particular - -- but yes, something i've
> experienced *on the job*).
I mean, of course, that I've been on the *receiving end* of threats of
physical violence on the job (relating, not to just monkey foo -- but
to the economics of the job site).
-t
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
To: arch-users@regexps.com
CC: tiemann@redhat.com, mark@codesourcery.com
Subject: [arch-users] why make a spectacle
Sender: arch-users-admin@regexps.com
X-BeenThere: arch-users@regexps.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:arch-users-request@regexps.com?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:arch-users@regexps.com>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users>,
<mailto:arch-users-request@regexps.com?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: a discussion list for users of arch <arch-users.regexps.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users>,
<mailto:arch-users-request@regexps.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.regexps.com/pipermail/arch-users/>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 17:24:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-UIDL: hTC"!LCb"!"~:!!\a##!
I hope people are not offended by the volume or unpleasantness.
Under some circumstances, one must SCREAM, in my opinion.
-t
_______________________________________________
arch-users mailing list
arch-users@regexps.com
http://www.regexps.com/mailman/listinfo/arch-users
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- regexps.com core dump,
Tom Lord <=