<html><head/><body><html><head></head><body>I deserve the rebuke for the release schedule. The release schedule was not even mentioned in the email to which I responded.<br>
<br>
The NASB ball was dropped by at least 2 volunteers before I personally took the task to finally make it happen (unwillingly, but I did commit and spend quite a bit of time on it, so I deserve the rebuke).<br>
<br>
I have been following the discussion on the SFTP patch and hadn't seen it come to a conclusion yet regarding what might be necessary to detect SSL support in cURL. I don't feel I've been negligent with this.<br>
<br>
I have no sympathy and honestly think the email Jaak sent was rebellious by nature, having never had a patch submitted by Jaak, nor any recent complaint or correspondence, along with the accusation of issues with "code quality" being the reason for the fork.<br>
<br>
I take the criticism I deserve, but none of your valid criticisms have anything to do with the original thread.<br>
<br>
Regarding release schedules, our private email conversation, Karl, were productive and I thought I had outlined a plan to you. I accept the accusation of a deficiency in release times. I tend to be a perfectionist and want to get everything in that I know is pending before a release, we keep SVN very stable-- worst case, packagers already apply patches to our releases and can easily release a distro package from HEAD if they choose-- but I told you I would move forward with a plan to settle with what we have in HEAD now and release unless we had warranted pending items from an actively developed solution to a problem voiced. I'm not sure why the public criticism now, but accepted.<br>
<br>
Feel free to publicly vent your frustrations about release schedules, but please start a thread that warrants constructive conversation rather than the heavily loaded, non-constructive, generic insults expressed by a non-contributor which started this thread.<br>
<br>
Troy<br>
<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">Karl Kleinpaste <karl@kleinpaste.org> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap:break-word; font-family: sans-serif; margin-top: 0px">"Troy A. Griffitts" <scribe@crosswire.org> writes:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">I'm not quite sure why the rebellious nature of your email, instead of<br />a friendly conversation</blockquote><br />Troy,<br /><br />I can summarize with a pair of excruciatingly simple, personal examples<br />why this sort of "rebellious" plan comes into play. I've got no<br />relationship to it myself (I'm not a git user yet myself and have no<br />beef with SVN, being unconvinced of the existence of some groundswell of<br />objection to SVN use; this discussion is the first I heard) but I<br />understand the motivation perfectly well.<br /><br />The short summary answer is simple:<br />Friendly conversations manifestly don't accomplish anything.<br /><br />The long detailed answer requires those
mentioned examples.<br /><br />1. 29 Aug 2007 (5 years, 16 weeks ago)<br />I sent a note to sword-devel, my first in /agent provocateur/ mode,<br />arguing for a more regular release of the engine, trying to express a<br />firm opinion while still being supportive. At that time, 1.5.9 had been<br />out for a year-plus and 1.5.10 had been pending much too long. I argued<br />that the needs of BibleTime, then-GnomeSword, and the other frontends<br />were not being properly served by the excessively long delay in a world<br />where frontend releases were happening between 2x and 5x per year<br />apiece. At that time, your response was to (claim to) commit to a rough<br />6-month release schedule for the engine.<br /><br />As Greg observed, this time it's been 26 months. That's 20 months too<br />long. That's 4+ times as long as your (claimed) commitment.<br /><br />2. 10 Nov 2008 (4 years, 5 weeks ago)<br />I sent you a private note about NASB, with a couple others Bcc'd, some<br
/>of whom subsequently made themselves known and a couple of whom did not.<br />My note pointed out that, at that time, we were approaching 5 years of<br />waiting for one measly module to come to fruition -- a module that is<br />arguably the #2 most-requested Bible module. Yes, it's Just Another<br />English Bible...but it's *NASB*. It had already then been in beta more<br />than 2 years -- it was already in beta before I got involved with<br />GnomeSword. Again, you made fervent promises to see to finishing up the<br />NASB module (or module set, including the Heb/Grk lexicons) right away.<br />Well...5 years then plus 4 more years now is 9 years, and the 9th<br />anniversary of the plan or intent or mere fond hope for a NASB module to<br />be released will come up in early January, based on original sword-devel<br />chatter about it. The truly sad thing is that all the NASB module needs<br />is one afternoon of serious hackery, then kick it out the door to<br />Lockman. The
Sword-using world has been waiting another 4 years for you<br />to find one afternoon.<br /><br />You know of course that in just the last few days I sent you a couple,<br />very brief private notes about the need for 1.next. Nothing combative,<br />nothing remotely "rebellious," just noting that it is impossible for me<br />to make another Xiphos release until you make another Sword release:<br />Driven by chatter here, I committed Xiphos to XHTML filters, which are<br />incomplete in current release. And then, pointedly, I forwarded one IRC<br />question, plaintively asking whether Sword ever gets updated any more.<br /><br />In all seriousness, what living, vibrant, active open source project<br />goes 2+ years without a release?<br /><br />Given that the issue has been raised publicly now, and that your<br />defensive reaction takes the form of criticism for being "rebellious,"<br />well, Troy...<br /><br />Please look in a mirror. Look closely at the face you see there.<br
/><br />This isn't rebellion. It's frustration.<br />This isn't rejection. It's dejection.<br />This isn't denial (of you). It's acceptance (of what you've shown us).<br /><br />A great many believe, on evidence, that without occasionally whacking<br />you over the head with a calendar -- in essence, "see, it's overdue<br />again" -- no Sword engine release would ever occur at all. Your<br />priorities are very seriously detached from those of the rest of us.<br /><br />That many of us have had to ask, over and over and over again, over a<br />period of many years, to please get with the program and provide the<br />support that the rest of us need, is or ought to be testament enough<br />that something is very wrong, and has been very wrong evidently<br />throughout the life of Sword -- since years before I showed up, surely.<br /><br />You are the founder of The Sword Project, which puts you in charge of<br />it. As its titular leader, I wish you would spend some serious time
in<br />prayer and come to a conclusion -- a real conclusion, embodying a real<br />commitment, one way or another -- as to whether you are willing to<br />provide such leadership, and get on with things.<br /><br />Please lead, follow, or get out of the way.<br /><br /><hr /><br />sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org<br /><a href="http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel">http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel</a><br />Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page<br /></pre></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html></body></html>