[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: moving of dinstall run time on master.

On Sun, Mar 28, 1999 at 10:47:42PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> First, why is this on debian-private and debian-devel?
> Stephen Crowley <crow@debian.org> writes:
> > > Wait a minute.  Since when does Novare dictate Debian policy?  Why are 
> > > you, or they, forcing decisions on Debian solely by virtue of your
> > > status as a donor of equipment to Debian?
> > Last I checked the time dinstall runs was not part of policy. Moving the
> > time will not affect the project at all.
> I see.  Neither are directories on master.  So I guess that anytime
> some donor to the project wants to nuke everything in /home/Debian,
> they have that right, because they're the ones donating the bandwidth
> (and after all, this would cut down on the bandwidth, could be their
> argument)?

Uhhh no. Changing the dinstall time will not affect the project at all.
Nuking directories WILL affect the project. That is is where the line is

> Please.  Debian policy does not grant any outside entity the right to
> mess with us.  Debian policy doesn't explicitly prohibit deleting
> random .debs from the archive either.  Maybe a donor could just delete 
> X because it's large?

Like I said, deleting things would negatively affect the project so that
would not be appropriate. They *could* do it, but then debian would have
every reason to find someone else to host it. You shouldnt bitch about
things which will not affect anything.

> > > Once again, Novare people are invoking their status as Debian donors
> > > as justification for imposing decisions on Debian.  Regardless of
> > > whether the move is justified (I believe it is), you are not the one
> > > to force this decision on Debian, and the fact that your company
> > > donates equipment to Debian gives it no special right to control
> > > Debian.  Where does the Constitution, or the SPI Bylaws, state that
> > > donors have control over Debian affairs?
> > 
> > It has nothing to do with the constituion or bylaws, its common sense. If
> > someone is *donating* something, and they want to change something which
> > will *not* affect the project and make their lives easier. Then by all
> > means, it should be done. 
> Who gets to say whether it will affect the project?  They said "it
> will be done".  Period.  They gave no option.

It doesnt take a rocket scientists to figure it out. Either it affects the
project or it doesnt.

> > 
> > > > Moving dinstall's run time involves more than just the ftpmasters.  They do
> > > > NOT run debian.  They work FOR debian, and FOR the developers.  Because of
> > > > this, I decided to have broader distribution of this notice.
> > > 
> > > Novare does not work for Debian or for the developers.  Why should
> > > they make a decision?
> > >
> > Because they donate bandwidth and hardware.
> Ohhh.  I see.  So because somebody gives us stuff, they now have a
> magical control over the project?  Interesting philosophy.

No, like i said, they should have control over things which do not affect
the project. Your generalities dont apply here.

> So, let's say that the company hosting Debian decides that, "gee,
> Joe Developer doesn't need his account because he bought his CDs from
> somebody else.  Let's just delete it for him because it saves us
> bandwidth."  You see, while they own the hardware, they don't own the
> contents or the developers' files.  They were trying to control those
> things which they don't own, a power which has not been granted to
> them.

Let's be realistic, please stop making up these stories (no matter how
entertaining they may be) and look at the facts. Novare wants to change the
dinstall time, they are taking suggestions on when to move it to. How is
this being unreasonable? They could just say "screw it" and pull the
project. By your reasoning they do not have this right.

Stephen Crowley
Debian GNU/Linux - http://www.debian.org

Reply to: