Re: agreeing with the DFSG (was Re: non-free --> non-dfsg)
Hi Craig,
> > I get the impression that my objectivity is being misinterpreted again.
>
> not sure what you mean by that. i thought i was quite careful to state
> that i was using a generic "you" in my examples, and not referring to you
> personally. if you got that impression, then i apologise because that was
> not what i intended.
There is no need to apologize Craig. I understood that you were using the
generic "you." I just thought that you misunderstood what I was trying to
say. "My bad." :)
> i agree. i don't think developers have to 100% agree with every single
> one of debian's policies. I do think, however, that developers
> should agree to abide by debian policies, and working within debian's
> constitution to effect any changes, and (more importantly) they should
> agree with the "spirit" of the social contract and DFSG.
I wholeheartedly agree!
> unfortunately, "spirit" is an ill-defined and nebulous thing, hard to
> pin down exactly. The Social Contract and the DFSG are a good attempt
> to define debian's spirit.
Very true. In general the DFSG and the Social Contract seem to do a good
job of attempting to define Debian's spirit. I agree with you again!
> your comments about leaving when/if you can no longer agree with
> debian's policies is kind of what i meant. i don't think anyone should
> be kicked out (except perhaps for extreme cases, which i cant/dont want
> to imagine right now), but that their own priorities for what they feel
> worthy of donating the time/energy to, and perhaps their own sense of
> honour, will make the decision to leave.
It seems that we have had some misunderstandings. I am very happy that
things are clearer now.
> similarly, i think that people who don't have a committment to debian's
> "spirit" shouldn't join up as developers in the first place. they should
> find somewhere more in tune with their own beliefs...they'd be happier
> and more productive, and so would we.
Ditto!
> BTW, people have left debian in the past for several reasons - including
> running out of time (i.e they graduated or got a new job), and also over
> major disagreements in direction. some have gone on to do other, equally
> worthwhile and valuable work either by themselves or in another group.
Yep, I remember one notable one.
> > My concern is that Debian is becoming (almost) elitist.
>
> what's wrong with elitism :-)
>
> there's too much mediocrity in the world. more elitist high quality
> stuff is needed.
Well, when you put it that way... :)
> > Some people are flat out saying "conform or get out," in a sense. Is
> > this really a healthy attitude for Debian to have?
>
> i think you are greatly exaggerating the strength of the comments that
> have been made.
Perhaps you are right. I don't recall my state of mind when I made that
comment ...heh, "I have no recollection of that..."
> OTOH, if someone ever did something seriously damaging to debian i
> would hope that they did have the decency to voluntary get out without
> dragging us all into a huge fight over whether they should be kicked out
> or not.
One more agreement from me!
> > The fact that my opinions go against what is apparently the Debian
> > mainstream way of thinking doesn't mean that I should leave.
>
> however, if (after you have had your say) the majority of developers
> think you are wrong and the vote goes against you then you should either
> a) shut up about it for a reasonable period of time - several months at
> least, or b) voluntary leave if you can't do (a).
I'd agree with you more about this if more developers were more vocal
about how they feel. Right now less then a quarter of the developers seem
to express their opinion or even vote (someone correct me if I am wrong).
> > If used properly, diversity of opinion should only help Debian. Those
> > with opinions that differ from the mainstream should not be branded
> > "heretics" or encouraged to leave.
>
> you could have the debian chicken (in a slashed-circle) branded across
> your forehead.
>
> we should put that in our constitution. heretics to be branded and
> marched out with a cattle-prod. maybe have different brands for the
> different heresies so that all can see at a glance what kind of
> perversion the branded one will try to lead them into.
>
> btw, if you think that paragraph needed a smilie then you need to get
> out more and relax a bit.
LOL! No, no, you didn't need a smilie face. That was really funny! Does
this mean I don't need to relax more? :) You know, we should send some of
debian chicken t-shirts to a certain software company we all know.
Thanks for the discussion and clarification Craig!
-Ossama
______________________________________________________________________
Ossama Othman <othman@cs.wustl.edu>
58 60 1A E8 7A 66 F4 44 74 9F 3C D4 EF BF 35 88 1024/8A04D15D 1998/08/26
Reply to: