[Pre-emptive hint: I have no interest in arguing any of these matters,
and will probably ignore all further mails in this thread. This is
purely a naive attempt to reduce the noise on -devel by explaining a
few things that people seem to be missing]
On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 06:24:39AM +0200, Wolfgang J?hrling wrote:
> Adam Heath <doogie@debian.org> wrote:
> > hurd does not exist alone in the universe, it exists alongside
> > debian.
>
> True. But for most people in Debian, the Hurd doesn't exist at all and
> they "don't feel like caring about the Hurd". That is not only my
> subjective impression, but also what Debian developers said in the past
> (and some did behave accordingly). I would love to see the Hurd people
> and Debian people cooperate, but like Jeroen (and others as well), I
> have given up any hope and don't think that Debian will ever change in
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the necessary ways, as we were even told by people that they are
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (I draw people's attention to the indicated text)
> unwilling to understand the Hurd-related issues.
<sigh>
This is exactly the sort of attitude that people object to. I'm going
to try and spell this out very clearly, without any pointless personal
rants:
A port of Debian is supposed to be a Debian system which runs on
another platform. That means it's a policy-compliant system which is,
as far as is practical, the same as all the other ports of Debian.
The thing in the archive's "hurd-i386" section has never demonstrated
any interest in becoming a port of Debian. It appears to be an attempt
to create a different system which happens to run a wide selection of
Debian packages. It seems to be roughly as similar to Debian as
FreeBSD is.
Expecting people to accomodate this, or to give it any particular
priority over their work on Debian proper, is naive.
Arguing with any of these statements is futile. You [the person who is
currently typing out a pointless response] are not going to change
people's opinions of the hurd-i386 tree by sending mail to
-devel. Instead, if you don't like the current attitude, go and do
something that has a chance of changing it. Making the hurd-i386 tree
comply with Debian policy would be a good start, and that includes the
sections of it which originated on linux systems. Complaining about
the policy only reinforces the belief that you have no interest in
creating a port of Debian.
> Putting people like Jeroen who complain about these things in your
> killfile won't help
It will probably reduce the number of pointless flamewars on -devel,
while not noticably impacting the quality of the software
produced. This probably counts as helping. I can't think of a better
use for a killfile than eliminating mails which commonly contain no
useful or interesting content.
> Debian people prefer to ignore these issues.
Bingo. They also prefer to ignore issues in other systems which they
have no interest in working on. This should not come as a
surprise. Expecting things to be otherwise falls under the category of
<invoke demon=Manoj>telling volunteers what to do</invoke>.
I suggest that the "Hurd people" get an archive set up somewhere at
gnu.org, and create their new operating system. Someday, somebody
might port Debian to it.
--
.''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
: :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
`. `' | Imperial College,
`- -><- | London, UK
Attachment:
pgpQZN4o6Tfhy.pgp
Description: PGP signature