Re: Debian's problems
On 14-Sep-99, 18:19 (CDT), Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> wrote:
> we've been over this argument many times over the last few years: there
> is no good reason to stop people working on unstable just because a
> frozen release is being worked on.
The problem is that the frozen release *doesn't* get worked on, because
it's more fun to release new versions and create new packages than it is
to fix bugs.
> if YOU want to work on the stable release, then go right ahead, it's
> useful and important work to do....but don't force everyone else to
> work on YOUR goals - some developers don't even give much of a damn
> about stable releases because they feel that "unstable" IS debian
Ok, I can deal with that. I truly agree that is a legitimate point of
view.
<rant butsemiserious="true">
I would appreciate it people who felt that way would publically
say so, or at least notify the release manager, so that the release team
can have no compunction about removing their broken packages from the
stable release, and so that e-mails complaining about how out of date
stable is from those people could be ignored.
Perhaps we need a new field in the control file:
Use-in-stable: yes/no
</rant>
I'm somewhat disturbed by the use "YOU want to work" and "YOUR goals".
The first line of our constitution is "The Debian Project is an
association of individuals who have made common cause to create a free
operating system." (Yes, I know that line isn't normative.) To me,
"common cause" implies some level of cooperation and shared goals.
Obviously, 500+ people aren't going to agree all the time. But being
part of a group like this implies a willing to bend once in a while,
work together, and get something done, even if you don't 100% agree that
the goal is needed. If we're just 500 people building packages that are
compliant with policy, what's the point?
Steve
--
Steve Greenland <vmole@swbell.net>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
Reply to: