30 replies to this topic

[WanWizard]

It seems it is not clear to you, weren't you complaining about the username of the user which foked your repo?

 

Yes, but again, that has nothing to do with the forking. If you'd forked it to github user boki15, we would not have had this part of the disussion.
 

We would still have the point that it wasn't discussed first. If you had, the entire forking business wouldn't have been neccesary in the first place, the translation setup could have been made directly on the correct repo, instead of via a weird fork.

[boki15]

 

It seems it is not clear to you, weren't you complaining about the username of the user which foked your repo?

 

Yes, but again, that has nothing to do with the forking. If you'd forked it to github user boki15, we would not have had this part of the disussion.
 

We would still have the point that it wasn't discussed first. If you had, the entire forking business wouldn't have been neccesary in the first place, the translation setup could have been made directly on the correct repo, instead of via a weird fork.

 

No, you can't tell your users which usernames they can pick on github and which they can't. Process of forking involves a username mainly because some specific user must do it. You did complain about the process of forking as during that process fork was done by user which you simply dislike the name, not more and not less. By that, of course it is part of forking process, again.

 

You would not have at all any of that discussion if you wouldn't have complained and all that where you did know it all. You can try to twist it now, but obviously it is not ok to fork your repos, especially if you can't specify which username suffixes and prefixes should not fork, as that seems now to be the only last problem?

 

Is there a wiki page where you tell your contributors how to contribute to your github? Did you describe anything presented in current thread there? Please show it first and if you dont have it, then write it to void next time denounce of yourself in such things, you can then refer that you wrote in that guide that you will not accept any PR's from accounts having as suffix or prefix openpli, however, by that you still can't restrict anybody to choose their username, it is not your service, it is github offering it, hope you get it finally.

 

 

the translation setup could have been made directly on the correct repo, instead of via a weird fork.

 

Another assumption, assuming is not knowing but you write it as if you would no. However, it must make you really thinking after you find out that it was done from OpenPli repo and not from OpenPli team repo and that the passed request for free service was created for github.com/OpenPli/enigma2. So far about you testing and checking stuff and then telling me about "assumptions" . You were even told that in your PM and here, it seems there are other reasons why you forget it, like that you either did not read it or ignore it or forget it. Whatever of those it is, you cant blame me for that.

[WanWizard]

You did complain about the process of forking as during that process fork was done by user which you simply dislike the name, not more and not less. By that, of course it is part of forking process, again.

 

No, I didn't, hence my remark it may have been lost in translation.

 

I said that "the combination of the github name, the use of the logo, and the fork of all our repos suggested to us some fowl play", because we've had plenty of experience of this in the past. Which is something completely different from "you are not allowed to fork".

 

Is there a wiki page where you tell your contributors how to contribute to your github? Did you describe anything presented in current thread there? Please show it first and if you dont have it, then write it to void next time denounce of yourself in such things, you can then refer that you wrote in that guide that you will not accept any PR's from accounts having as suffix or prefix openpli, however, by that you still can't restrict anybody to choose their username, it is not your service, it is github offering it, hope you get it finally..

 

For the 4th time: I did not reject your PR for any of your suggested reasons, I closed it because it had a merge conflict, and I even give you the link to our CI so you could see the failure.
 

We also don't give a toss what name you pick. But if you pick "OpenPLiTeam" or "TeamOpenPLi" as name, any blind person would make the same assumptions we made, wether or not that was your intention.
And we may not be able to block it, we sure as hell may not like it!

 

Another assumption, assuming is not knowing but you write it as if you would no. However, it must make you really thinking after you find out that it was done from OpenPli repo and not from OpenPli team repo and that the passed request for free service was created for github.com/OpenPli/enigma2. So far about you testing and checking stuff and then telling me about "assumptions" . You were even told that in your PM and here, it seems there are other reasons why you forget it, like that you either did not read it or ignore it or forget it. Whatever of those it is, you cant blame me for that.

 

Yes, because as you didn't discuss it up front, we have no clue what you did, how it is configured, what rights that tool needs on the repo, whether or not that means the original repo can be used without side effects, and so on.

 

Again, all this could have been avoided if you'd opened a topic saying "Hey, what about an online translation service, wouldn't that help?", so we could have replied with "Great plan, lets see how we can implement that, what you can do, what is needed from us, who that is going to do, and so on".

 

Instead, you did it all yourself, without consultation, tossed it over the wall, and are now pissed off by the fact we say "Hey mate, it doesn't work that way".

[boki15]

 

For the 4th time: I did not reject your PR for any of your suggested reasons, I closed it because it had a merge conflict, and I even give you the link to our CI so you could see the failure.

Hmmm. Another nonsense. It just shows how you treat facts and that it is who is assuming all the time ignoring facts. Do you know that you closed it or do you assume that you closed it? Can you show me where you closed it?

 

This is the PR: https://github.com/O...igma2/pull/2538

Just go there (anybody can) and you clearly see that you did not close it, I closed it, do you know how? I even said and explained in this thread that I closed it. According to your words, I am lier (as I wrote it) and you are saying correct things, well, not working with git, the history has it all.

 

You were told 3 times to give me your GPG public key so that I can encrypt and send you all credentials for OpenPliTeam, it was not lost translation, you ignored it simply, where it was part of the first PM transifex at all. If you blame anybody, then yourself for not reading carefully.

 

 

We also don't give a toss what name you pick. But if you pick "OpenPLiTeam" or "TeamOpenPLi" as name, any blind person would make the same assumptions we made, wether or not that was your intention.

 

You describe yourself as blind person who did not know anything and in panic you missed PM and a thread and PR which you seem to falsely remember that you closed it. Did you maybe delete the branch too? If you dont know look up in PR. Somehow you were trying all the time to prove me that on this forum nothing gets lost but it does all the time and your previous post is just another confirmation, I dont blame you for this, it is your project, when you recognize it you might then be thankful to those who have pointed to it.

 

 

Instead, you did it all yourself, without consultation, tossed it over the wall, and are now pissed off by the fact we say "Hey mate, it doesn't work that way".

 

This is open source and you seem not to collaborate, hell, I could open transifex without you, it has more protection for license and everything else than this obsolete forum soft offers compared to it. That is normally how open source works, if you change some code of open source and want it to be publicly available then you are free to do so if that is the goal of this project.

 

 

I said that "the combination of the github name, the use of the logo, and the fork of all our repos suggested to us some fowl play"

 

It did not suggest any foul play, you also had a PM, point on that. Everything you write now is maybe possible assumption before the post in this thread or your PM and before it was done, there was no PR with changes, those were done at the same time to void confusion. Now you do not have guides, nor proper collaboration rules, nor really guides for those who would like to learn how to do such things. Just looking your history of commits shows that those changes are not done by their authors, that tells you a lot of how you PR, review etc... and Travis is also not enough, you could and can automate full build process too for all models you offer, I am quite sure that nothing of it would be new for you, you just lack on time. However, if you lack on hands and time its kinda contraproductive how you refer to "foul play" and reasons for it.

 

I hope you can explain which foul play was there, can you? Do not assume anymore, say I dont know if you have to assume, better than things like "I closed the PR" and similar.

[WanWizard]

You were told 3 times to give me your GPG public key so that I can encrypt and send you all credentials for OpenPliTeam, it was not lost translation, you ignored it simply, where it was part of the first PM transifex at all. If you blame anybody, then yourself for not reading carefully.

 

What part of "We don't want that account, we want that account gone, as in yesterday" didn't you get?

[boki15]

 

You were told 3 times to give me your GPG public key so that I can encrypt and send you all credentials for OpenPliTeam, it was not lost translation, you ignored it simply, where it was part of the first PM transifex at all. If you blame anybody, then yourself for not reading carefully.

 

What part of "We don't want that account, we want that account gone, as in yesterday" didn't you get?

 

What part of "You can have it" didn't you understand? Being that rude, close it by yourself and I will watch how you do it.

 

You dont get that "We dont want it" is something different than "fork for some bad purpose" or "did not discuss with us" or "you do not have access" or any other of nonsense you wrote and if we are on that you even managed to lie, telling something which you know in front is not truth is considered to be a lie. By that, watch in your mirror and ask all questions you have yourself, it is only you who is here confused, lied and showed not a lot clue about tools you pretend to use like github, you want your users to read your rules and know how it works in this obsolete forum but then you do not do it with your git which seems to be productive system, well yeah, watch into the mirror and you will find the fault.

[WanWizard]

We don't want it. I thought I was clear days ago?

 

We also don't want it to exist, for whatever reason, but that is a different point.

 

You can be angry all you want, fact remains this has been an enormous waste of time for both you and me, which could have been avoided by not starting on your own without prior consultation.

 

Case closed.

[boki15]

 

We don't want it. I thought I was clear days ago?

No you were not, you were instead trying to paint some totaly different story

 

 

You can be angry all you want

 

Seems the only one who has run out of arguments, started insults and has been in general irrational, which happens normally if you do not have arguments to explain your point. I guess that person could be angry and as it looks it is you not me. It is totaly different story that you are angry when you take somebodies work, release it under gpl license and then you want to apply your trademark on enigma2? , nah you don't need to reply to this one, whoever read this thread was clear about it some posts ago.

 

 

fact remains this has been an enormous waste of time for both you and me

 

I would only partially agree with you, it wasted your time, I still can use it for all languages which require translation and I want it, in fact, taking care of it would result much faster and better in few months than your translations are since almost 20 years, for just getting rid of non source lang translations in translations you will require few more hands and probably another 20 years if it took you 20 years to get the result you got. I am at least honest in my opinions and you can agree or disagree and have own opinion.

 

 

which could have been avoided by not starting on your own without prior consultation.

 

Yes, you and other here could have handled it properly instead you decided to push some lies as agenda and even managed to lie, which I assume was not your intention but the fact is you did. You also tried to push all the nonsense you did like "dark agenda". You even could have placed your public key which by the way you actually probably should have somewhere in your users banner if your users want to send you some sensitive info here or on github, having signed commits for OpenPli means you have gpg, I could have used keyserver to get it, however, I do not need if you use that key or not for encryption. Another ignored point is security of this board which in first line is the reason I asked for ability to have encrypted communication even if this boards users (me/you) loose access to their account or DB simply being dumped and decrypted.

 

Anyway, you could have even got the access to delete and I would even do so like I said in begin, but you pushing obviously some nonsense agenda does not look like if I am willing to waste my time on deleting it. You don't need it, but your license does not deny it to community to use it and run, it is not your decision, you can do your own official team and write somewhere now that OpenPliTeam on github has nothing to do with you, just dont lie that it was done for some dark agenda and no rules are broken.

 

And post please your license for image you claim I copied and show me that license please, I find no information about it or copyrights, you should be able to provide license and license file/text in your repo for your sources, probably best is if you get it on another repo and put appropriate licenses, but hey, I dont need to give you tips , you know it by yourself. So, as already asked, post please on github licenses/headers/meta of your image sources, if I could not find it, then please point me to it, in every other case just stop complaining then if no law/license is broken.

[boki15]

@WanWizzard after being caught lying you delete your posts showing it, this thread is about posting translations you got them posted https://www.transife...penpli/enigma2/ , those they are, translations in this thread. Thats how you keep properly the history, delete it when it fits your agenda when get caught lying, you do same force pushes on github? Those language files are not under commercial license and it had many authors, it is not yours.

[boki15]

@WanWizzard after being caught lying you delete your posts showing it, this thread is about posting translations you got them posted https://www.transife...penpli/enigma2/ , those they are, translations in this thread. Thats how you keep properly the history, delete it when it fits your agenda when get caught lying, you do same force pushes on github? Those language files are not under commercial license and it had many authors, it is not yours.

I have to excuse myself now, I oversaw this thread: https://www.transife...penpli/enigma2/

[WanWizard]

It was moved here by a moderator to keep this seperate from users posting translations.