Subject: bug#28811: 11.90.2.2017-07-25; preview-at-point

From: Ken Sharp <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2017 09:40:25 +0000

At 21:59 05/11/2017 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:

> >> Given the rather acrimonious past history of our discussions, I think
> >> it may be better if I hand this to a colleague. I'll speak to someone
> >> tomorrow and see if they are willing to take it on.
>
>I am not sure that having to start over explaining will lead to an
>improvement of my ability to communicate.

I think it will, because frankly I'm not prepared to keep listening to what 
I consider abuse. I feel I've tried to be reasonable here and up to now, 
polite, and you still haven't supplied what I've asked for. I will admit 
that on every email I learn a little more about what *exactly* you are 
doing, but I'm tired of the drip feed of information, laced with snide 
comments.

I don't need this level of stress, and I don't actually have to put up with it.

At this point my own inclination is simply to refuse to restore the 
operator. However I can recognise that I may be being unreasonable, 
potentially due to a simple clash of personalities. So, to try and act 
professionally, rather than simply washing my hands and walking away, I'm 
going to ask someone else to deal with it.

Perhaps there will be less of a conflict of personalities and you will be 
able to work more easily with others. This also gives you an opportunity to 
persuade someone else of the merits of your case, without prejudice from me.

I will, of course, forward on the previous emails and my understanding of 
the situation so far.

[later]

After discussion, we've decided the best way forward is to repoen the bug 
report and continue this in public, rather than by email. This would have 
been my preferred option originally, and was what I suggested, because it 
obviates the need to reprise the situation for the other developers. Well, 
water under the bridge. I have added David Kastrup to the CC list on the 
bug thread.

When you have a PostScript file, please attach it to the bug:

https://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=698680

I have forwarded on the emails to date, verbatim, and described what I 
understand of the method of operation and requirements, along with my own 
suggestions. I won't take any further part in the discussion of the bug, to 
avoid influence.

Please do not reply further to me on this subject, as I will simply delete 
such email unread.

                     Ken