For example video call is not a great method for me because of the following reasons:
* I'm not a good English speaker (especially I sometimes have difficulty with colloquial American English)
* I prefer open communication
Although it's totally fine that you have a preference, I have no doubt that core library maintenance should have more acceptance and transparency.
Frankly, it feels extremely unfair that you ask us to focus on "technical matters" (which excludes maintenance for some reason) only, while you frequently use non-technical reasons (your diseases and the situation in New York) as an excuse. Your asthma doesn't rub me in the wrong way; your tyrannous behaviour does. With all due respect I suggest you not to use CLC privileges to cope with your personal stresses.
and more details to follow in a few days, i'm pretty fried, there was a police shooting this morning 1 block from my aparment plus a whole mess of stuff going on in lowermanhattan where i live most of the time this week thats got me on edge and stressed out of my gourd.
i've added a few folks at uploader/contributor bits, and this is generally something all core libraries need. i really prefer discussion via video call or voice chat or 1-1 neutral language..
yesterday i was pretty laid up with some pretty bad asthma etc and allergy drugs, and I'm sorry if that rubbed you the wrong way .
chessai . <chessai1996@gmail.com> writes:
> Yes, please contact me about these concerns. I am reachable via email at
> chessai1996@gmail.com.
Great, I’m looking forward to seeing this matter resolved swiftly.
I am a fan of discussing community matters openly, but everybody can
of course decide whether they want to speak up publicly or privately
talk to a trustee.
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020, 12:24 PM David Feuer <david.feuer@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I urge everyone to direct all further comments on this topic to the
>> current chair of the CLC. There is nothing to be gained from public
>> discussion of a "personnel" matter.
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020, 10:03 AM Profpatsch <mail@profpatsch.de> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I posted this comment on the thread of
>>> https://github.com/haskell/random/pull/62#issuecomment-638088258
>>>
>>> Since it was deleted and the comment thread locked by Carter,
>>> I am escalating this request to the mailing list, where it cannot be
>>> deleted.
>>>
>>> Profpatsch <notifications@github.com> writes:
>>>
>>> > @cartazio Please take even a fleeting look at
>>> https://github.com/idontgetoutmuch/random/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed,
>>> notice the amount of discussion and the timeline.
>>> >
>>> > This is the full-time work of a team of half a dozen of experts,
>>> probably breaching one man-year of effort, easily.
>>> > It cannot just be discarded out of hand.
>>> >
>>> > I have been following the discussions (spread over mailinglists, issue
>>> trackers and elsewhere), and I propose you hand over maintainership of
>>> `random` as a base package.
>>>
>>> A parallel issue with relevant discussion can be found at
>>> https://github.com/haskell/random/pull/61
>>>
>>> I am writing this email from my personal account, because I fear for
>>> the health of the Haskell ecosystem, and I think Carter’s behaviour is
>>> extremely detrimental to it.
>>>
>>> I think a lot of other people feel the same way, so I encourage you to
>>> add your voice publicly.
>>>
>>> ~ Profpatsch
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Libraries mailing list
>>> Libraries@haskell.org
>>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libraries mailing list
>> Libraries@haskell.org
>> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries