Bug#994388: dpkg currently warning about merged-usr systems
On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 02:31:27PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
> On 2022-04-08 09:36 +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > The dpkg maintainer has chosen not to engage with the TC in #994388, and
> > now seems to be actively subverting a validly-made TC decision.
> > I do believe it reasonable to assume the dpkg maintainer has a point if
> > he believes that the currently-chosen way of moving forward is harmful.
> > However, the right way for him to make that point would have been to
> > engage with the TC, the body constitutionally placed to resolve
> > conflicts of this manner, not ignoring them and then doing whatever he
> > wants when the decision inevitably doesn't go his way.
> > I encourage the dpkg maintainer (Cc'd) to engage with the TC in this
> > matter. It is not yet too late;
> That all sounds reasonable, but there is the long-standing issue that
> Guillem has never accepted that the TC has authority over the
> project. I forget the details, but given that he does not see it as
> valid it's not surprising that he is not engaging with it.
Why does that matter? I honestly don't care.
Debian has a set of rules. It's called our "constitution". We all follow
those rules when we engage with the project, for instance when we are
wouter@pc181009:~/debian/webwml/english/vote$ grep 'guillem' */*voters.txt|wc -l
You don't get to exercise your rights in our constitution in one
instance but ignore your duties in another. The constitution exists, and
it is not an optional document. Either you agree by it (and then you get
to vote, etc), or you don't (and then what are you doing here). If one
party can get their way simply by ignoring the rules, then we might as
well pack up and forget this whole Debian thing even happened in the
There have been cases in the past where Debian has made decisions that I
disagreed with. There have been cases where I seriously considered
leaving the project. In the end, I chose not to do so, in part because
the rules we follow made the decision a fair one, even if I did not
agree with it.
For clarity, and again, I am inclined to agree with the dpkg maintainer
on the matter of how the /usr merge should be implemented; but I am
seriously offended by how he is acting in this manner. This is not how
things should be done.