Bug#688772: gnome Depends network-manager-gnome

[Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org>]

Ian, I consider myself an uninvolved party in this matter; I don't
really want network-manager installed on my systems, but I'm not
particularly keyed up about it.
I'm not on the TC.
I have been following the issue enough to have an opinion.
I'm reasonably good at process issues, and think I understand the
process issues involved here.

I'm disappointed to immediately see this discussion turn to assumptions
of malice and reprimands.
Would you be willing to consider how the TC as an organization and you
in particular might learn from this incident and be more effective in
the future.
When I find something like this happens to me, I try and put myself in
the head of the other person and ask what they might be doing.

When I do that I hear I find a couple of possibilities.
One is that  the gnome-meta maintainer is trying to  meet the letter of
your intent while trying to work around it.
Would you be willing to set that aside for a moment and think about
other possibilities.

Another possibility is that the gnome-meta folks have been confused and
frustrated by  this whole discussion. They don't see what the big deal
about n-m is and they want to provide a good experience for the users.
They received a decision they don't really like from the TC with some
complex rationale and so they  tried to follow through that rationale
and balance their goals against the rationale the TC stated as best they
could.

In point 3 of your resolution, one of the points you make is that users
don't have an alternative because only the most minimal gnome package
(gnome-session) can be installed without pulling in n-m.

I think  a reasonable person could read that section of the resolution
and conclude that if n-m were pushed into more inclusive meta-packages,
then the argument might be different.

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.

Would you be willing to consider
1) focusing on accomplishing the specific immediate goal you
want--perhaps points 1-6 in your proposed resolution.
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.
I would be happy to contribute some thoughts there if desired.

Thanks for considering my requests, and thanks for continuing to spend
the time to follow this issue.