Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
Hi.
I'm very pleased that you took the time to write a thoughtful response
to my message.
I appreciate that you're trying to work with me even though the
situation is frustrating and you feel under pressure to work towards the
solution you want in time for wheezy.

    >> Now, I'll admit that there was probably some searching going on
    >> for how to fit some goals into what the TC proposed. I'll admit
    >> that there might have been some ask for forgiveness not
    >> permission going on.  But all those things are normal with
    >> frustration.

    Ian> What kind of emotional state do you think I should have after
    Ian> the legitimate and unanimous authority of the TC has been
    Ian> undermined in this way ?  Perhaps I would be frustrated.

So, you're frustrated because you went to a lot of work  and you feel
that someone is working to undermine your work?

You'd like to express those feelings and get them onto the record?
If I've got that right, I'd ask you to think about various ways of
accomplishing those goals.
For myself, I think I might have better luck if I tried to connect with
the  gnome-meta maintainer and help them understand how I felt.
I would hope that by achieving that connection they'd be more likely to
consider their impact on me in the future.
My hope would be to get to a state where they say "Sam tried to work
with us even though we disagreed and the decision was against us so I
should consider my impact on him."
I think that's going to be more productive than someone who thinks "Well,
Sam's going to dislike this and yell at me."

So I might right a message to the gnome-meta maintainer (copying a list
if I felt I needed to do that) talking about how I was frustrated and
how I was having a hard time finding an interpretation that was not
about subverting the decision.
I'd probe for misunderstandings as well as try and build an
understanding of the emotional impact on me if there was no
misunderstanding in fact.

Everyone has different communication styles.  What works for me might
seem verbose and silly to someone else.  However, I'd ask that you
consider the effects of communication both on others (even if you don't
feel you're getting that from them) and on accomplishing your goals
whatever they are.
    >> And then later having a serious discussion about how you and the
    >> TC can write resolutions that are more likely to achieve the
    >> long-term goals of the TC while avoiding frustration.

    Ian> Normally we write our resolutions with the intent that people
    Ian> will not subvert them, or work against their intent.  That is
    Ian> after all required by the Constitution.

    Ian> If we need to make them watertight against malicious and
    Ian> lawyerish interpretation, then we will need to anticipate every
    Ian> way in which the maintainers might try to subvert our intent.
    Ian> Along the lines of point 6 in my proposal.

So, you're concerned that if you try to make the resolutions water-tight
that others might wish for more respect?

That makes a lot of sense to me.
I think  though that  whenever a maintainer is overruled there is likely
to be a lot of frustration and disappointment.
That can get in the way even when there is no malice.
I might have added something like "The TC requests that the gnome-meta
maintainer confirm that upgrading from squeeze to wheezy without
network-manager installed does not install network-manager. We'd be
happy to assist with this work if desired."
I might move some of the rationale text out of the resolution proper.
So the resolution focuses on the specific actions as well as the desired
state in the decision part and avoids too much other text.

Obviously others would approach things differently. For example, I think
you considered the rationale portion important to have in the body of
the resolution.

I think though that discussing the desirability of the upgrade behavior
in the decision part would not be overly-legalistic. If I were
overruled, I don't think a nicely worded request like that would
increase my frustration or disappointment.

Thanks again for your time.
I wish you the best of luck on quickly reaching a decision within the
TC.