Hello Pascal, As we're getting to the end of useful arguments here, I'd like to ask you to step back for a minute and take a calm look at what you're writing. Imagine you were receiving such messages rather than sending them. Would you want to spend more time collaborating with the person addressing you that way and to receive more such messages? Perhaps this is another reason why you aren't getting as much support as you'd hope.
You did your best to provide nuanced feedback on a debatable backwards-compatibility issue — current behavior is obviously wrong but can't be fixed without a hard compatibility break: > some wild guess / wishful thinking You spent thousands of hours thinking about what would be best for users of the framework — getting occasional thanks and only occasional abuse, as we're lucky to have a positive community: > what is practical for core developers is NOT the same as what is practical > for users You don't need backwards compatibility because you're comfortable living on the edge but you always take the time to create deprecation paths according to the compatibility policy: > even if it means creating a task force just for keeping a slight eye on > compatibility shims You do your best to discuss positively with an agressive contributor who started with a strongly-worded blog post and doesn't seem to process the responses he's getting: > All that to face red herrings Here's literal belittling: > *your* little version of Django And the cherry of the cake, stating core devs are secret sadists: > Punishing users This isn't how we hold discussions here. You need to take a clue from how other people interact on this mailing list. Then you can put your energy and ideas to good use for improving Django. >From a pragmatic perspective, putting people off isn't a good way to get them >to cooperate with you. For example, Luke was open to amending the deprecation policy to better reflect reality. You should have suggested some concrete changes, erring on the side of caution. Instead you chose to repeat the same argument, except more agressively. This doesn't get us any closer to a documentation patch. In fact this reduces the likelihood that someone will choose to spend time writing that patch. You last email sounds like you're throwing your toys and walking away because you didn't get full agreement with your position. However, that outcome was largely predictable when you were bringing up a position that diverges so much from the current practice. To create progress, it's up to you to create consensus around small steps and to create the corresponding pull requests, in that order. Best regards, -- Aymeric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/E1632450-C0E8-410F-A3BB-03B5FAD94C13%40polytechnique.org.
