[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Regaring: Requesting new udebs



Op 13-07-2007 om 21:33 schreef Frans Pop:
> On Friday 13 July 2007 09:44, Robert Millan wrote:
> > Ok, but please let's not make a big fuss of this.  The udebs were just
> > added to the archive, not to D-I.
> 
> And you also added them to all CD images...

Did he? [1]

I would assume a simple CD build script, that adds each udeb to the first CD.
I think giving a list of D-I team approved udebs, to that build script,
will improve the situation.

> > And I requested it out of ignorance, not malice
> 
> I'm sorry if this seems like making a big fuss to you, but this is about 
> the third or fourth time this happened in the past year or so, so this is 
> not just targeted at you.
> 
> That said, I'm pretty horrified that you apparently feel it is OK to just 
> decide to do things without having any clue about what you are doing 
> (which is rather obvious given the issues I've identified with these 
> udebs) and that you apparently did not even feel it necessary to *ask* 
> people who _do know_ how such things work.
> IMO this shows a rather serious lack of judgement and responsibility.

My advice: Delete the above text and take a different approach.

Expect that "addition of udebs with best intensions" will occure again.

This project will have enthousiastic contributors that seen no harm
in adding a udeb to archive. Forbidding them to make that addition,
will scare them. And when contributors leave, the project will die.


Proposal:
Educate contributors. Explain why something went wrong.

Hint: Use:
  Doing foo caused error bar.
(avoid: Because you did foo, we have now error bar )


> > (and Julien accepted my request in the same situation). 
> 
> As I made clear in my original mail, I'm not blaming Julien for anything.
> He is not a member of the D-I team after all, while you are.

And I would have done same. And also with the best intentions.



> Cheers,
> FJP


Cheers
Geert Stappers

[1] the "he" is mostly a respons on the '_you_ did'
    what followed/follows is an attempt to get the discussion in the
    group.  (at least are words like "you" and "he" avioded )

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: