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

Re: gcc 3.2 epoch?

On Thursday 09 January 2003 10:04, Miles Bader wrote:
> The point is that the extension you've proposed above doesn't change
> anything -- the `real' version used within many contexts would still
> be the full-with-epoch version.  The fact that there's an additional
> `upstream version' field wouldn't change that anymore than the
> current ability to strip off the epoch does, so there's little poitn
> to having such a field.
> -- 
> Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're
> guessing.

Could this _non-sense_ please be stopped?
Exchange the above content and signature and you still have the same 
outcome: There is no point in wasting technical and neuronal bandwidth 
to replace working solutions with xxxxxxx ..., neither 

- epochs
- Debian release numbers
- mass bugging wishlists
- (fill in any cruft here that you find occasionally on the main 
developer mailing lists, that should keep people actually working 
on/for/with Debian together)

If you find yourself, like me, giving up one list after the other, 
because most spam is more interesting than intended content, you will 
surely _know_ what i mean.

May be you will find that i'm myself too quiet, but while working in 
the background i cumulate a feeling that one of the greatest things on 
this planet, Debian project, is slowly dying if the real problems are 
not going to be handled:

- real brokenness of dists
- transitions
- NM
- BUGs
- growing administrative work, project mgmt.

to name only some. Hold your breath for a moment and i'm sure you will 
find at least one point to add ...

My english is bad as always and i'm missing the words now, so let me 
simply express how i feel: i really love you people, working on 
infrastructure, keeping the archive going, looking after new and old 
releases, making up your minds about transitions, working on great, 
usable pkgs and working with the press - that you appear less and less 
on the lists makes me think, that your workload is rising more and more 
- and it is exactly that what is happening: the real work is going to 
be put on less people everyday, if anybody else thinks ... or better, 
really doesn't!

Every new 'WNPP report' is a clear sign, we've already seen valuable 
people leaving the project, loosing more will be deadly IMHO. Although 
i'd be the first one to stand up against two tier maintainer structures 
or anything like that, i currently have to admit that i'm proud of 
anybody who is really doing something to keep the project going.

The world keeps changing, IT does and so has the Debian project - i 
don't think that it can shrink by artificial means. We will have to 
develop _ways to go_, like oldtimer developers did in the good old 
days, only that hardware and speed is no longer the issue, but clean 
interfaces and clear tasks are. And there is one word through all the 
times, discipline, meaning the spiritual habitat of each (knowing when 
and why to keep quiet for instance) that makes it possible for the 
plenum to learn and prosper from day to day.

Each port shows the incredible flexibility of the Debian project, 
upstream developers sometimes just can't believe it. Taking policy as 
policy, commercial use simply as such and trying to guess some of the 
spirit that brought us all to where we are (eg. DFSG, Social Contract 
come to mind) i strongly believe that Debian might well have an 
unforeseeable future, if it can survive tomorrow ...

EOT. Sorry for the additional noise. Honestly kind regards, martin

Reply to: