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

Re: Bug#224742: Related to this issue...

Scripsit Kalle Kivimaa

> I don't think it reasonable for a developer to keep open wishlist
> items that are known not to be implemented ever.

Is the maintainer/upstream known to be immortal?

> I don't think, however, that a unilateral announcement from the BTS
> maintainer about closing access to the BTS for a single developer is a
> good way of handling things.

That is my main point.

> But as I read the constitution, it is the right of the BTS
> maintainer to do so.

Does the constitution attempt to be an exhaustive definition of bad
ways of handling things?

Even though the constitution gives the BTS admins the powers to make
decisions about the BTS, it doesn't follow that the decisions they
make are always Right. The proper functioning of the BTS is essential
to the project, and if the BTS admins get away with crippling it by
arbitrarily excluding developers from using it if they hold technical
opinions that are disliked by individual BTS admins, the project as a
whole will suffer in the end. Therefore I think it is appropriate to
speak up on debian-devel when we see that happening.

Henning Makholm                           "I always thought being *real* sad
                                        would be *cooler* than acting *fake*
                                 sad, but it's not. It's not cool at *all*."

Reply to: