On Thu, 2004-06-03 at 11:39 +0200, Piotr Kopszak wrote: > On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 05:51:26PM -0300, Scott James Remnant wrote: > > [I am not subscribed to debian-amd64, please Cc: me if you feel your > > reply deserves my attention.] > > I decided to write, as I'm rather new to all the decision-making > process going on in Debian. Please, disregard it if you don't have > time for that or consider it unimportant. > Ah, you seem to be assuming we have a "decision-making process" ... the official project one is through General Resolution or invocation of the Technical Committee. Neither is generally used unless absolutely necessary. If you feel this wasn't my decision to make, by all means assign it to tech-ctte or if you're not a Developer I'll happily do it for you. > I was really stunned by the arrogant manner in which such important > decision was announced. But what really are the implications? Is > Scott James Remnant the person to decide, whether effort of many > people should be wasted? > *shrug* I maintain dpkg, therefore I think I am entirely within my rights to make arbitrary decisions, yes. I might make wrong ones every now and then, I'm not convinced this was one of them. There isn't any wasted people effort, only a few hours of CPU cycles and even those aren't wasted -- you've proved things can build with them. > Is he backed by any Central Party Committee which has executive > powers in Debian? > There is no such committee. > I'm sorry for this terminology but it all reminds me the communist era > too much. > Huh? Central Party Committees sound communist to me, not people freely making decisions. > Do things like this happen often in Debian? > Flamewars? Frequently. > One of the greatest advantages of Open Source software, as I see it, > is freedom it gives to the user and developer, and here we have a blatant > example of taking that freedom away, don't we? > Taking what freedom away? Your rant has descended into stupidity. Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part