From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | Álvaro Hernández <aht(at)ongres(dot)com> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Using postgresql.org account as an auth id on third party websites |
Date: | 2019-09-24 06:53:09 |
Message-ID: | d7f4508f-7662-f686-d701-37d6382a48bf@kaltenbrunner.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
On 9/23/19 6:09 PM, Álvaro Hernández wrote:
>
>
> On 23/9/19 9:28, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> On 9/23/19 2:20 PM, Álvaro Hernández wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23/9/19 10:26, Dave Page wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 10:45 PM Álvaro Hernández <aht(at)ongres(dot)com
>>>> <mailto:aht(at)ongres(dot)com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 21/9/19 12:32, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>>>> > On 9/20/19 3:14 AM, Álvaro Hernández wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > [...]
>>>> >
>>>> >>> Oh, and as a general rule, "requesting" unpaid volunteers to
>>>> do work
>>>> >>> for you for free is in general not a great way to get them
>>>> >>> enthusiastic about helping out.
>>>> >> Did I do so? I don't recall where or when I said that.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Irrespective of this: what you say I read as:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> - Either volunteers, due to being unpaid, are not doing their
>>>> job
>>>> >> correctly (completely);
>>>> > tbh as one of those volunteers, I kinda find it pretty
>>>> irritating that
>>>> > that the very first time somebody asks for community auth being
>>>> opened
>>>> > to non-pginfra managed sites an association of "us" not doing
>>>> our job
>>>> > correctly comes up just because that feature does not (and/or
>>>> is not
>>>> > implemented in the way you want it) do like.
>>>>
>>>> TBQH, I'm having a really hard time to understand how this
>>>> conclusion could be derived from my words.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's exactly what I've inferred from your emails, and clearly I'm
>>>> not alone :-(
>>>
>>> In between this sentence you are replying to, and the next one,
>>> there was this one which you removed from your response:
>>>
>>> "For the avoidance of doubt: Stefan, and any other pg-infra volunteer
>>> or anyone else how felt bad about my words: my deepest and most
>>> sincere apology. I never, under any circumstance, intended to do any
>>> negative statement about the job done or the team itself. I have a
>>> great deal of respect to any kind of volunteering in general, let
>>> alone for the one on helping on the technology that I love. I have
>>> volunteered tons of work on Postgres myself, and I cannot otherwise
>>> that feel in the same page. pg-infra: I know the work that you do and
>>> have done, and I really appreciate it, specially given how small team
>>> you are."
>>>
>>> The fact that you are still replying to the above sentence with
>>> the paragraph that follows removed, means that either:
>>>
>>> * you didn't read it (in which case, please do);
>>
>> have you ever considered that dave just wanted to express that he had
>> similiar feelings to what I had - simply claiming he didn't read your
>> apology seems like a weird interpretation...
>
> Have you ever considered accepting, or even thanking, my apologies?
>
> Or at least, tell me if they are not enough for you.
The appology is for sure enough and I do accept it - thanks for saying that!
regards
Stefan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-09-24 08:06:03 | Re: Bogus reports from coverage.postgresql.org |
Previous Message | Eya Badal Abdisho | 2019-09-24 01:05:38 | Wiki editor privileges request |