[Libre-soc-dev] #981 update

[Dmitry Selyutin]

Luke, I'm aware of your personal situation, and this is the only reason I'm
still communicating. I'd have not wasted so much time and energy to argue
with any person, and would just literally told something rude (I won't post
examples here, but you can easily guess a couple of phrases which could
have been a perfectly apt alternative response to anybody less personally
important to me).

Yes, this is, even though approximated by magnitude, is what I mean. Please
understand: I'm fine with writing a report on my work, that's what I do on
an everyday basis. It's not the fact that you asked to summarize the work
(by the way, you haven't done it in task, in my opinion, you just mention
it here, but I treat your replies in the task differently) which made me
angry. I am pissed with wordings like "this is done too fast" or "this has
too little code"; they simply disvalue what I've done. In fact, I'd have
expected the praise for that, not blame. This is the second time from you,
and there was a similar statements from Jacob.

I can and will write reports (despite that I already wrote those throughout
the scope of the tasks), but I will not look for an excuse if I did
something faster or with lesser amount of code, this is nonsensical. Plus
it contradicts our guidelines:

Q: What if i take a longer or shorter time?
A: If it's shorter, great! you still get the same gift/donation (good for
you!) If it's longer, then, well, this is really no different from having
given a "quote" for a job. If that's really problematic we may be able to
sort something out.

So, to summarize:
1. I ask everybody to drop this idiotic practice of accusing somebody of
doing something fast or simple, it contradicts to common sense and
depreciates the actual value of the work. You might alternatively lower the
budget if you feel the task ends up being simpler (but keep in mind,
simplicity pretty much depends on the person who develops).
2. Please avoid from switching task scope here and there as you like. There
must be an agreement between all parties. As stated per one of your
comments in 981, you are ready to approve budget, because it made a lot for
982. But this is not correct. I did 981, and did exactly as was discussed
in description and comments for 981 and 982. It's unfair to claim that I
did something else. In fact, I almost did both, including the most crucial
pieces for 982; does my budget for 982 really reflect it? I doubt it. But
even with this in mind, you and Jacob had a courage to estimate my works as
too simple and having a little code.
3. Do not contradict to your own guidelines. If you need to update them —
bring it to discussion. However, as I said, I see no practical point in
limitations for time or code size, they are absurd and will effectively
kill the project. And I feel absolutely sure that's not what any same
person expects, and I believe this definition of sanity includes NLnet and
EU auditors.

Best regards,
Dmitry