Re: Draft new DFSG
On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 11:53:50PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
> Joey> Complete agreement here, I dislike the consitution, the new policy
> Joey> maintainence system, developers not being able to close bugs in other's
> Joey> packages, and all the recent buerarcracy of the past 6 months.
> depend on the heroics of remarkable people who accomplished the
> impossible.
No matter how much delegation and openness and voting there is, when
it really comes down to getting something done, it's often in the
hands of one or two individuals. Certain things just are best not
done by committee.
> We need protocols that do not depend on intimate camaderie, and
> those that do not have us depending on the genius of pioneers. We
> need an infrastructure that us mortals can handle.
Sure, but.. mmm hard to put a label on it, as this is more intuition
than anything concrete, but I really have got a feeling of too much
concern with the minutiae as of late. See the proposed DFSG2 compared
with the original - it is a pile of legalese that most people who just
want to write some free code will probably snicker at, due to its
lawyerlyness. Not that the intentions weren't good, but really.. we
are programmers, not lawyers, let's get back to doing what we do
best. To ensure that we can keep doing that, and to make sure what we
are doing is truly what we want (free), we need some general rules and
guidelines, but no more than necessary, please. We could spend
forever bickering about details...
Please take this with a grain of salt, as I stated above, this is
based on my gut feelings more than anything else.
--
David Welton http://www.efn.org/~davidw
Debian GNU/Linux - www.debian.org
Reply to: