My resignation

Chris Lingard chris at
Tue Jul 13 14:36:56 PDT 2004

jeremy at wrote:

>> On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 22:52:24 +0100
>> Chris Lingard <chris at> wrote:
>>> I also disagree with IRC being used for design; it is ideal for
>>> discussion; but proposals should be posted to hackers.
>> Indeed, that's why I've made a conscious effort to not venture in there
>> over the last week or so.  I was getting too caught up in the unstable
>> side of things and agreeing to changes without realising the full impact
>> that they may have.  I really feel that my place is somewhere near the
>> 'testing' branch - I can see what the last stable release was, and what
>> the upcoming changes to stable are.  I can also see the changes going
>> into the unstable branch, but from an impartial outsiders point of view.
>>  I'm not saying I'm the only one that can or should do this, merely that
>> that's what I think my efforts should be concentrated on.
>> Cheers,
>> Matt.
> I still do NOT understand what people have against IRC!!!!  There's no
> communication medium where it's easier to talk things out.  And Matt, by
> staying away from IRC, you're isolating yourself from a relatively large
> contingent of the community.  I DO NOT like discussing things on Mailing
> lists, because:
> a) It takes too long to get feedback
> b) active interaction sucks, so you can't get clarification
> If the community wants to shut out IRC, let me know - I'll shut down the
> IRC servers and we can go on about our merry way.

It is the wrong medium because most of us are not on IRC.  The ideas put
forth, are not open for discussion.

It is also too abrupt.  If you post something that I hate, I can delay a
day, thinking out my response.

I also like the idea that this knowledge is posted "in writing", so
it is available for everyone.  I do not know what this heated arguement
was that caused Alex, Zack, Jim Gifford, Richard and Jeremy to resign.

But if it had been on the list, I am sure that people would not get so
upset.  Though part of the problem is lack of compromise towards progress.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list