Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] [PATCH] packet-dcerpc.c: clamp to tvb length and display mult
* On Friday 2004-12-03 at 10:51:12 -0800, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> In answer to the question that Guy posed, I _think_ that we should always
> put the padding in the tree, because people can get confused if they are
> following along the byte view when clicking on fields in the tree and they
> see unaccounted for bytes. It is awfully easy to think the dissector is
> wrong, and by the same token, it becomes easier to spot mistakes in the
> dissector.
Also see a comment about "Ethereal as a learning tool" I made in another post.
> Charles, I don't think there is any overt discrimination going on here.
> Just a bunch of independent rational actors who look at what has been
> contributed and the time they have on hand and their own priorities and
> then decide whether or not they can integrate new changes.
I have to apologize to list members if I used a tone that was perhaps
too accusative or even paranoid. I do have been put through a form
of personal attack in the not too distant past that was designed to
accomplish just that.
SKIP-THIS-IF-YOU-DON'T-CARE
My integrity and reputation have been soiled behind my back and a lot
of _strangers_ have harassed me as a result of it, but that is not the
stressful part. What is, in a very Kafkaesque way, is not ever being
accused of anything to my face and so not even knowing what things are
about, thus not being afforded any kind of due process, but mostly
having to try to understand how ordinary people (who should, by all
expectations, believe in the core principles of a democratic society)
would participate in what amounts to totalitarian-inspired behavior.
All I have are my educated guesses on all that matter and the sound
knowledge that I am a nice, if somewhat complex and unusual, person
who has always believed in and practiced the ethics of reciprocity and
didn't do anything remotely worthy of serious reprehension, while not
being perfect. (If the person who initiated all this against me is who
I think I was, then that person was known around for having sucessfully
used false-accusation blackmail in the past, namely by past targets of
that blackmail, making all this all the more difficult for me to accept,
but I have to. Even child molesters are not put to the level of _some_
of the things I had to endure of strangers.)
I hope you can understand how this might have affected me, just as it
would anyone. This is why an alarm goes off in my mind when I fear
that I am being treated differently, because I markedly have been in
the not too distant past. It didn't use to be (quite) that way.
Enough of that, I'll just fire up a copy of Eliza now and won't bother
you with this again... :-)
END-OF-SKIP
> You know what? One of the easiest ways to deal with this is to give you
> commit access to SVN ...
First, let me say that I'd be flattered if you extended that level of
trust towards me. But I think that would actually be orthogonal to the
issues I was raising in that responsible use of that access would imply
getting feedback on my own patches before commit anyhow (in case of my
making mistakes, being irrelevant, or breaking the build on a platform
to which I don't have access).
> Of course, you have done the right thing. Squeeky wheel and all that :-)
I'm not sure what you mean there (about doing which right thing, but also
the meaning of "squeeky wheel" as I am not a native speaker of English
and some cultural references, nursery rhymes, or really offensive swear
words you never hear on TV all remain unknown to me).
