Bug#975075: tech-ctte: non-systemd dependencies in non-NM packages
General arguments about how the TC should conduct its business do not
belong on this bug.
I'd appreciate it if replies to this message are directed to a different
place than this bug.
We've established that the TC is operating consistently both with its
historical process and with currently permitted behavior for a group of
You're making an argument about what the TC's behavior should be that is
general, not specific to this issue.
Please make that argument in a general forum and do not tie it to this
You're also making an argument that has been made before without
choosing to avail yourself of the history of the discussion on TC
My recommendation would be to find someone who agrees with you who has
followed that history and learn it--at least the parts of the history
that support your position.
Your argument would come across stronger if you did.
>>>>> "Felix" == Felix Lechner <email@example.com> writes:
Felix> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 5:48 PM Sandro Tosi <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> the ability to talk privately with the committee is something
>> CTTE has allowed for a long time
Felix> Debian has many great traditions, but the Magna Carta is much
Felix> older. I found a great article about it (, p. 5):
Felix> "the simple human need for fairness, reflected in western
Felix> jurisprudence since at least 1215 when it was pronounced in
Felix> the Magna Carta, underlies the legal concerns about ex parte
Felix> communications during administrative decisionmaking
Felix> processes. Fairness certainly requires an impartial
Felix> decisionmaker, and often the appearance of impartiality can
Felix> become as important a factor in the legal review of fairness
Felix> as actual impartiality."
Fortunately for all of us, the TC is not a legal body, and this is not a
legal dispute process, nor does jurisprudence apply as a concept.
Yes, you can consider whether concepts from jurisprudence should wrap
over to Debian processes, but you need to actually justify that, and
consider the trade offs.
It is unsurprising to me that the trade offs for a legal process that
can deprive someone of property and life work out differently than the
trade offs for a body charged with choosing a technical path for an
That's true even when people are emotionally invested in the outcomes.
Fairness is one thing that someone might value.
It tends to be highly valued in jurisprudence, but other things might be
valued more highly in a proceeding like the TC.
And you don't get fairness when the process is emotionally draining
enough that key stakeholders refuse to cooperate.