Re: Unsupported Debian [was: Re: [New maintainer] Working for De
David Starner <dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org> writes:
> >I am not aware of any policy of the sort.
>
> Right, and that's half the problem. It appears that such has become a
> policy without being announced. There was a claim that it was announced on
> IRC, but someone came forth and said that he sent an email to that effect
> to someone, but did _not_ announce it. Which, in my mind, is worse.
No, there was a private IRC conversation about the status of someone's
application. This person was told it was not ready yet. James did
not say that it was done in email, he said it was done in IRC, and
that it does not matter what medium it was done in, it was not an
announcement of any sort. I do not have the transcript, nor should I
expect to have the transcript of a private conversation, so I am going
by the word of both participants in their posts to this list.
There real problem here David is long delays in application
processing. The FUD that you and others are spreading about "de-facto
policies" is not helping us solve the real problem. A suggestion and
subsequent discussion on debian-private is not the way policy is made,
de-facto or otherwise. There has never been a policy proposal to stop
accepting new maintainers, there is not active policy in place to do
that.
What you have so far is a private conversation on IRC about a single
users application status being construed as an announcment, official
or otherwise that new-maintainers is no longer accepting new
applications during the potato freeze. So based on about 1% fact, and
99% innuendo and rumor, you are now spreading FUD that there is a
policy in place to not accept new applications.
> defacto policy, then that's wrong, because it denies potential maintainers
> useful information and hampers current developer's discussions about it -
> how do you argue against a policy that technically doesn't exist?
It does not exist in any capacity, not as a de-facto policy, and not
as a technical policy. The term "de-facto policy" is itself a
misnomer, as such a beast could never exist. It is not part of Debian
policy unless it goes thru the public process of policy
creation/ammendment.
If new-maintainer is having difficulties keeping up with the
applicants than we need to remedy that situation if at all possible.
The last thing we need is a bunch of FUD being spread, and rumors of
some draconian Debian closure. Having the already way overworked
new-maintainers staff answer trumped up charges from every person with
poor reading skills and paranoid delusions about fascists Free
Software nazis is not really conducive to solving the REAL problem
here; long delays in application processing.
--
Craig Brozefsky <craig@red-bean.com>
Free Scheme/Lisp Software http://www.red-bean.com/~craig
I say woe unto those who are wise in their own eyes, and yet
imprudent in 'dem outside -Sizzla
Reply to: