>>> A chaque fois que j'entends parler de theo de raadt, j'ai l'impression qu'il envoie toujours chier les gens qui bossent sur son projet, et qu'il agit comme un dictateur qui pète plus haut que son cul (pour rester poli).
Je crois que les devs savent tous que Theo gueule facilement et qu'ils ne s'en préoccupent pas plus que ça. Contribuer à ce projet implique d'avoir le cuir épais. Si ça rebute certaines personnes ben tant pis pour elles.
Je crois que celui qui a fait le meilleur résumé de la situation c'est J.C. Roberts sur ce post d'Undeadly : http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=201007211(...)
"When people actually care about something, they tend to have strong opinions. When you are wrong, you hear about it, very directly and in no uncertain terms. Absolutely no one is given special treatment. You have a choice between being offended and leaving, or appreciating the criticism and trying to do better. The people who get offended are the ones who have missed the obvious; another person just gave you their time in writing out their opinion and correction. They may have skipped showering you with sunshine, rainbows and ponies, but how you feel is unimportant. The thing that matters is the thing they care about, the best way to do it.
For the unfamiliar and across cultural/language boundaries, this approach can seem very abrupt at first, but if you look at it pragmatically, you'll see it is highly effective and efficient. On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero, so time is the limiting factor for everyone. When you view this macabre observation in the context of the very limited free time available for fun hacking, you'll finally understand why communications tend to be very direct and terse. ".
[^] # Re: Une ch'tite question sur Theo
Posté par patrick_g (site web personnel) . En réponse au journal OpenBSD et le piège à troll. Évalué à 9.
z'ont pourtant pas l'air malheureux les devs OpenBSD : http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=201007250(...)
Je crois que les devs savent tous que Theo gueule facilement et qu'ils ne s'en préoccupent pas plus que ça. Contribuer à ce projet implique d'avoir le cuir épais. Si ça rebute certaines personnes ben tant pis pour elles.
Je crois que celui qui a fait le meilleur résumé de la situation c'est J.C. Roberts sur ce post d'Undeadly : http://www.undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=201007211(...)
"When people actually care about something, they tend to have strong opinions. When you are wrong, you hear about it, very directly and in no uncertain terms. Absolutely no one is given special treatment. You have a choice between being offended and leaving, or appreciating the criticism and trying to do better. The people who get offended are the ones who have missed the obvious; another person just gave you their time in writing out their opinion and correction. They may have skipped showering you with sunshine, rainbows and ponies, but how you feel is unimportant. The thing that matters is the thing they care about, the best way to do it.
For the unfamiliar and across cultural/language boundaries, this approach can seem very abrupt at first, but if you look at it pragmatically, you'll see it is highly effective and efficient. On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero, so time is the limiting factor for everyone. When you view this macabre observation in the context of the very limited free time available for fun hacking, you'll finally understand why communications tend to be very direct and terse. ".