neroden@twcny.rr.com (Nathanael Nerode) writes:
> Matt Zimmerman said:
> >On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:56:59AM +0200, Goswin Brederlow wrote:
> >
> >> I know of several DDs and non-DDs thinking about creating a Debian2 (or
> >> whatever named) project due to this and other lack of responce
> >> problems and the group is growing. The danger is already there and
> >> should not be ignored.
> >
> >Why is this a danger? This is one of the freedoms provided by free
> >software, which we work hard to promote.
>
> This is a danger because it's a stupid waste of effort. The "Debian2"
> project would have exactly the same goals, and presumably most of the
> same software and processes, as Debian, except that it would be better
> about communicating: accepting or rejecting applicants in a timely
> manner, etc.
>
> Should we *have* to fork for *that*? The XFree86 people didn't want to
> have to fork for similar non-technical social issues, although forking
> was certainly considered. GCC had an egcs fork for similar
> social reasons, and eventually it 'took over' the main GCC development
> line, which ended up pleasing everyone. It seems better all around to
> just fix the breakage with the Debian processes, *if* possible.
It would also show that people have lost faith that they can change
Debians constitution, guidelines and operation to its members
likes. Any subgroup in Debian should have enough faith to at least try
to change Debian to head in a "better" direction. If thats lost its a
very very sad thing.
MfG
Goswin