Re: GOP2-5 - GLISS discussions

[Graham Percival]

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:39:53AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > PS: I'm still not happy with a separate mailing list.
> 
> A separate fluffy mailing list not to be taken seriously where people
> may decide that no further changes to syntax will be allowed.

That list will be deciding nothing.

> Now this sounds like full-blown paranoia,

It is.  What part of "Serious proposals, if any, will go to
lilypond-devel" is unclear?

I'm happy to rephrase this to make you comfortable.  What about:
"absolutely nothing will be decided on this list.  There is
absolutely no implication that any amount of approval from that
list will result in anything.  The list will have all the
authority of a handful of users meeting in an Amsterdam "coffee
shop", getting high on pot, and talking about how they'd run the
european union monetary system and what they'd do to the ly
language.  I really mean it.  No authority whatsoever.  Absolutely
nothing will be decided on this list."


> Anyway: If the project lead tells me that I am wrong taking these
> discussions seriously and they may move to another list where I am not
> supposed to listen in, and at the same point of time states that
> decisions need to be made, mentioning the decision to put a halt to any
> further syntax changes as one example of a possible course...

All decisions will take place on -devel.

> I don't see that my work so far warrants getting out the balls and
> chains.  This really sounds like it is supposed to end in a rehash of
> the story of Yunan and Duban.

David, after Waltrop I was really enthusiastic about lilypond.  I
saw the problems that Rudolfo had in trying to make a simple
change to the website, and I was really fired up to fix the
problems in the CG.  I was also fired up to organize weekly
discussions on irc and/or voice.  However, your insulting tone in
the GLISS emails has completely negated that enthusiasm.

You have told me that I'm not worthy of discussing the ly
language.  Well, guess what?  I happen to enjoy metaphorically
getting high on pot[1] and talking about world dominition.  And
guess what?  Janek also enjoys it too.  And Valentin.  And a
number of other people.  I want to bring together a number of
people, most of whom will know even less than me about lilypond
internals -- I'm going to be inviting people from lilypond-user.

[1] despite being from Vancouver and visiting Amsterdam, I've
never had pot.  This is metaphorical.


Now, if you don't want to read *my* ideas about the ly language
(and BTW, most of my ideas are not things which I think should be
actually implemented!), then you *certainly* don't want to read
ideas from random users.

The *whole point* of having a separate discussion list is to avoid
upsetting you.  I'm serious about this.  Han-Wen has wisely said
that he will ignore the emails.  Great, that's what I wanted!
You're now the only person taking these discussions in the wrong
way.  I never expected, nor wanted, to have somebody sitting at my
metaphorical pot-table complaining that my inspired solution to
the monetary crisis would never work because the chairman of the
european commission doesn't have enough power to implement the
changes that I wanted to make without approval from other
committee members.

Now, I imagine that you wouldn't enjoy getting drunk and BSing
about possible ly language changes.  That's cool, man.  You do
your thing, I'll do my thing.  As long as everybody involved are
consenting adults (or rather: consenting people, since there's
nothing wrong with children talking about the ly language), I see
no harm.


Now, do you seriously want the drunken-pot-orgy-frat-boy-quacks
discussions[2] on lilypond-devel?  Or would you rather that I take
them elsewhere?  The name "lilypond-quacks" was deliberately
chosen to emphasize the irresponsible/not-serious nature (while
still having a connection to a pond of liles, via ducks).

[2] BTW, can I add any more words to make it seem less
responsible?  maybe "stock market traders"?  "oil company
executives"?

- Graham