Sigfred HÃ¥versen <bsdlist@mumak.com> writes:
> The author of Neon knows very well that the svnserve SSL patch is
> not based upon Neon. The entire approach to SSL communication
> between Subversion/SSL and network is different. Despite this, the
> first thing he does is to post to a mailinglist (and just CC me)
> over stripping copyright from a trivial function for interopability
> with dav code that uses Neon, even though I credit the Neon
> library. Then he makes more insuations that he can't back up, but
> now he appears to retract some of them.
>
> All in all, I feel quite disgusted.
There seem to be some mails crossing each other on the wires. At any
rate, as a disinterested third party, I'm seeing nothing but
disconnect here.
May I suggest that all parties involved take a step away from their
computers for an hour or so, and when they return, read all mails in
all related threads without responding to any of them until they've
all been consumed and weighed?
I suspect what's going on here is that a simple mistake (or two, or
ten) has been made, and that none of it really justifies either the
level of bandwidth consumed, or the elevation of temperatures, present
on this list today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Oct 19 22:48:15 2004