Re: Bug#727708: init system other points, and conclusion

[Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>]

On Wed, Jan 01, 2014 at 08:09:56AM -0500, Chris Knadle wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 31, 2013 20:12:20 Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Steve Langasek wrote:
> > >On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 09:13:52PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > >> So unless the TC wants to remove a great number of packages from the
> > >> archive, you need to take into account the fact that some voluntary
> > >> manpower is required to implement your decision.
> > > 
> > > I think the current Debian GNOME team has a not-undeserved reputation for
> > > being obstructionist with respect to bugfixes that require divergence from
> > > upstream's stated direction.  If the team demonstrated they were open to
> > > contributions of the kind you described, volunteers to do the work would
> > > not be hard to come by.
> > 
> > That's an impressively high amount of doublespeak packed into a single
> > paragraph, particularly the words "bugfixes", "volunteers", and
> > "contributions".  At a minimum, I think you're overstating the situation
> > by refusing to acknowledge that the GNOME team does not consider the
> > changes forced upon them to be "bugfixes". 
> 
> Responding specifically to this:
> 
> > You (and other members of the TC) disliked GNOME's requirement of
> > NetworkManager, for reasons I still have yet to see explained coherently
> > anywhere.  You forced the GNOME team to remove it.  I certainly hope
> > you find "volunteers" willing to do that kind of work increasingly hard
> > to come by.
> 
> Re: dependency removal -- sort of.  The reasoning is explained  for the most 
> part in the tech-ctte decision for #681834. [1]  But just to fully make this 
> clear I'll also provide a brief summary of what I think happened at the time.
[...snip explanation...]

I appreciate the explanation, and I'm familiar with the contents of the
decision.  I simply see nothing there that should have motivated a
tech-ctte decision, rather than simply a couple of bug reports against
network-manager and an added Conflicts/Breaks or two.

- Josh Triplett