[rick@deirdre.org: BAD keysigning -- news]

[Aaron Lehmann]

On Mon, Aug 27, 2001 at 10:17:00PM -0700, Deirdre Saoirse Moen wrote:
> That said, it was extremely uncool of Dimitry to usurp this project 
> simply because a piece of mail didn't go through. A lot of us, 
> especially myself, know how to get a hold of Rick. Dimitry didn't 
> take normal due diligence steps, imho, to see that he could HELP Rick 
> get it done rather than just hijacking the project.
> 
> Let's not forget that open source relies on cooperation and trust -- 
> and that taking over a project is seen as a very harsh step -- 
> insulting even -- and should only be done if due diligence to try and 
> cooperate hasn't worked.

I really have to disagree with this. Dimitry is simply trying to pick
up a project where the official leader is having problems completing
it and admits that he is very busy. This kind of cooperation should be
rewarded. I will not tolerate Dimitry being insulted simply because he
is going out of his way to make this process quick and tolerable for
all of us.

As for Rick, he was copied on all the mails in which we decided to do
this, since the original plan (involving keys being sent by Sunday to
linuxmafia) would obviously never work. Rick could have responded to
these emails, if he didn't have technical problems. He of course did
not have a single working MX but this is quite frankly not our
problem. Sending multiple emails is indeed due dilligence, and we're
sorry if Rick can't read his email, but hopefully next time he won't
end up with such a grave misconfiguration. Rick was also present at
our physical meeting, where every one of us agreed that sending keys
to a keyserver was an appropriate action. As far as I can tell, Rick
is angry because Dimitry was the one who stood up and took control of
a deteriorated situation instead of Rick himself doign so.

Personally I am completely satisfied with the action plan that was set
up by us a group, with Dimitry devoting a lot of time into leadership.
I would like to ask if ANYONE other than a Moen has any problems
whatsoever with the scheme that we used to complete the key signing
process. As far as I can tell, we've all received the signatures that
we wanted, and the keyring that Rick is selfishly demanding adds no
value whatsoever to the output of this project. Does ANYBODY actually
WANT this keyring? Speak up! I am very disappointed with the recent
mail I've seen from Rick, and did not expect him to refuse to
cooperate with our simple process for accomplishing our goals. The
rudeness that I saw directed towards Dimitry was so sickening that I
am ashamed to be echoing part of it here.

To reiterate in a calmer way: We cooperated. Having a single point of
failure, we worked around our obstacle, and with minimal problems
created an alternate method to accomplish our goals. I am proud of our
teamwork and think that this is how "open source" should be. Rick Moen
isn't making it any easier by rudely demanding that we wait for him so
he can be in charge. Sorry. To grudgingly keep with Deirdre's software
development analogy, when somebody cannot maintain a project, it is
likely that it will be forked. Technical problems prevented Rick from
"maintaining" this project in the timeframe he proposed, so we did it
our own way, copying him on the emails for reference so he can catch
up. Our approach accomodates his signing our keys and uploading them
at any later date, as it becomes convenient for him. We feel this is
fair. If he doesn't, he doesn't have to sign our keys.