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

Re: mICQ roundup

On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 08:38:18PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> [aoache-comparison]
> How are these two scenarios qualitatively different?

Ah. Putting aside that apache and micq play in very different leagues, 
i see your point now and apologize for being blind to that before.

However i kindly ask you to not ignore the point that ruediger did not
only put code in the package that would break it if the maintainer
ignores his wishes, but also offered an immediate solution to fix the
broken Package.

I think it shows that he did not intend to harm users, but instead
wanted to be able to provide his users better support.

Rudiger did a great work on micq (I think there is nobody who can judge
that better than me, beside of Ruediger himself :-) and it would have
been pointless to invest that large amount of work into micq if he just
intended to harm the micq users.

Still i admit i would have wished that he'd tried other ways to fix the
Maintainer-Upstream Problem, but this has happened now and nobody can
turn back time.

Also, both -Martin and Ruediger- presented a solution and two people are
ready to adopt the package and even audit the source code, so i hope all
the people on debian-dev@ are able to put the focus back on the users,
take consequences from this incident for other packages (also in fixing
such-damaged Packages in the Pool) and are willing to give Ruediger back

I hope that Ruediger also understands now why his action was causing 
such a, err well... riot.
I also hope that Martin socially learned from this to be better at
communicating; i know he is capable of grasping technically things fast.

I did suggest this to various people before and i repeat it here:
It would be nice if mentors would not only look after really new
maintainers, but instead over people until they see them ready in t&s,
p&p and also in being socially able to handle other people.

Also, i find it difficult to judge people by some Checks done like it is
done now. Having someone at zero, throwing 5 or something texts at him,
checking if he read and understand the texts and then expecting him at
100 is bad. This will result not only in people who passed checks and
are not really ready to interact as debian maintainer, it will also
cause the burn-out syndrome to appear pretty fast.

It is better to let people learn while they are doing stuff, this is
more efficient for the learning people and will slow the burn-out
syndrome down; however it requires a larger amount of experienced people
who are ready to "consult" the "fresh meat".

| Rico -mc- Gloeckner 
| mv ~/.signature `finger mc@ukeer.de`

Reply to: