General TC > Remasters / Remixes - Unofficial
corepkg - a new core package and updates manager
roberts:
First of all the SQL was rejected because of size. Not only in the base but the database itself.
Second having to maintain a second database on the server is overhead that is not needed.
Third quick updates are already in 4.3 by using a 96k database. Keyword has been in the infrastructure since 4.0.
Martin had written that if this was rejected he would consider it as "enjoyed creating it as a bit of an intellectual exercise". Instead I get a threat of forking. Then an announcement of his new forked desktop on that webpage was no attribution to Core and was in violation of the GPL. I was not talking about corepkg but the forked desktop remaster.
Is this the way to react when rejected. Force your way in? Your way or else? Are these winning tactics to gain favors?
Finally we have rules that everyone else has had to follow and respect. So, given the forceful nature of Martin, we should ignore the rules that we have?
Martin has had PMs with me and I was not sharing it with everyone. They are confidential.
But Martin comes across as only trying to make a contribution? Oh please.
And now Guy, has to, again, personally attack me. It makes me sick.
martin:
--- Quote from: roberts on February 05, 2012, 07:55:19 AM ---Martin had written that if this was rejected he would consider it as "enjoyed creating it as a bit of an intellectual exercise".
--- End quote ---
I don't remember wording it like you say in the former, but the latter is true. I found it a great little piece of problem solving to engage it.
--- Quote ---Then an announcement of his new forked desktop on that webpage was no attribution to Core and was in violation of the GPL.
--- End quote ---
I PM'ed you about this with no less than 3 major places on the website where Core was attributed and credited. I may have unintentionally violated the GPL, which I attempted to fix, and I realised it (creating a spin-off) is not what I really wanted to do anyway. So deleted it all.
--- Quote ---Finally we have rules that everyone else has had to follow and respect. So, given the forceful nature of Martin, we should ignore the rules that we have?
--- End quote ---
I still have not been shown the rules I have broken. But if there were any, I apologise.
--- Quote ---But Martin comes across as only trying to make a contribution? Oh please.
--- End quote ---
The spirit of my well intentioned efforts have always been to make a contribution. I went over-dramatic in one place because I was convinced my concept introduced a great improvement, and created a "fork" because noone seemed wholly interested, but it really not what I wanted to do.
and Roberts is still acting hostile and cynical towards me and I cannot really grasp the motivation behind it. Apologies if I tread on anyone's toes here, and I mean ANYONE.
So, something happened between "hey, I made some extensions for you guys" and "hey, I got a great idea to improve handling of system updates and stuff" which set Robert off and I can't find what or where.
roberts:
You still cannot accept that it has been rejected for the reasons I have repeatedly stated.
I have no plans to bloat up the base or bog down the server with unecessary additional databases.
martin:
--- Quote from: roberts on February 05, 2012, 08:11:33 AM ---You still cannot accept that it has been rejected for the reasons I have repeatedly stated.
--- End quote ---
No, I have accepted the reasons why you don't want to bundle it with core.gz and/or Core Plus and I have no problem with that. At all.
--- Quote ---I have no plans to bloat up the base
--- End quote ---
Not asking you to.
--- Quote ---bog down the server with unecessary additional databases.
--- End quote ---
You don't need to. It all runs on my server.
I simply want to provide it as an extension that people can use. They download the package database from MY server (via corepkg, it is completely invisible to them unless they know the source code), and when packages are fetched, the mirror is read from the usual place in the system. That's it.
edit: clarifying last part.
Guy:
Just one question Robert: What part do you consider to be a personal attack?
Now a decision has been made. The idea is history. Let's all move on and be happy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version