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

Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64

First off I would like to apologize for my rude email to d-d/d-q-k that
was mentioned below. I was quite upset at the time which could have
easily been alleviated had certain key people involved with the buildds
decided communication was a useful tool.

On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 09:41:04PM +0100, James Troup wrote:
> Hi,
> If anyone thinks this GR will actually achieve anything positive,
> they're mistaken.

A GR to make the various delegated developers communicate would be better
but that probably wouldn't work either...

> If anyone thinks that trying to decide technical issues through voting
> is a good idea, I pity them.

I doubt anyone does, and it is a pity it came to this.

> If anyone thinks that they can insult people as much as they like[0]
> and that the people they insult still have some obligation to respond
> to them, they're entirely mistaken.[1]

People have had problems with certain people in Debian for much longer
than the quoted examples. Those people just don't seem to get
communication would solve nearly all of these problems and still fail to
have even basic communication with the rest of Debian.

> If anyone thinks "$foo doesn't communicate with $bar" == "$foo doesn't
> communicate", they're being at best disingenuous.

Wrt the comment I made mentioned below the buildd admins obviously did
not communicate with anyone outside possibly some private list. It took
over a month for even the DPL to come up with an answer as to what was
happening with the buildds. So "$foo doesn't communicate" is more
accurate in this case than "$foo doesn't communicate with $bar".

> If anyone thinks that abusing debian-devel-announce or GRs is the best
> (or indeed "only") way to force through their pet issue, they're very
> much mistaken.

No one thinks this is the best way, they think it is the only way since
certain people never communicate. In the case with the buildds the
buildd admins didn't even respond it took the DPL to act as a go between
to even get the information posted. This is not something he should have
to do, individual groups in Debian should be able to communicate without
having to go through the DPL as an intermediary. Sometimes it may be
necessary but it should be the exception not the rule.

> If anyone thinks Debian in general is good at communication, they're
> deluded.  I've filed bugs that haven't see any communication in over 4
> years.

A non-RC bug report is a little different especially in scope compared
to the issues that typically blow up like this. Example the buildds
being dead for over a month, or keyring not accepting new keys for 6mo+
(iirc), etc.

FWIW - If anyone thinks I am doing a poor job maintaining KDE please
join the maintenance group. You can even take over the package entirely
if you really want to. I don't want to be a blocker in Debian.

> I will not be blackmailed into doing things for people who have public
> tantrums to try and force stuff through.  In fact, it'll very much
> encourage me to not work on whatever it is they're whining about.
> (And others have warned that this is the case[2].)

The email [2] as mentioned below was primarily telling me to call you on
the phone about the issue. At least it seemed that way to me... Would
you like me to call you on the phone, perhaps I could spare the $20 or
so that it would cost to call you.

> If you want to help with getting amd64 into the archive then, please,
> reign in its more vocal proponents - they're only succeeding in
> delaying its addition to the archive.

This would seem to be a violation of the SC... Both points 3 and 4.

Of course no one should have to put up with abusive emails, but if the
abuse is a response to inaction by a person in an elevated position
they should think about why the person emailing them thought abusive
language was necessary. Perhaps it was because the person in the
elevated position never communicates when there are problems/issues. A
little communication goes a long way...

> -- 
> James - as always speaking only for myself
> [0] e.g. "every minute spent thinking of this fuckwit makes me lose
>           one month of life" [Josselin Mouette, the GR Proposer on IRC,
>           referring to Ryan Murray.]
>     or "The buildd admins must be incompetent or on crack."
>        [Chris Cheney, the debian-devel-announce@lists.debian.org
>         abuser, in http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20040120.041904.3885b3c4.html]

Which posts were abuse of debian-devel-announce? The quoted email was
not to d-d-a despite what the text seems to state. If you recall this
inappropiate email was about the fact that the buildds failed quite a
few packages and they did not get retried for over a month. It took
nearly a month after that email to even find out via the DPL what the
problem was[3]. If regular emails fail to gain any response sometimes
people do stupid and rude things like make the above comments. I
apologize for my comments, but the point still stands that you never
communicate until there is a big blowup on the lists.

> [1] Don't get me wrong - I couldn't care less if/how random people
>     insult me and the fact that several of the folks who keep
>     demanding its inclusion into the archive have been personally
>     abusive to me doesn't in anyway affect amd64's inclusion into the
>     archive.  It does however mean that I tend to ignore mail from
>     them and threads started by them.

Really all they want to know is what is going on wrt ftpmaster that is
keeping amd64 from being added. The DPL said it was more than just the
mirroring situation but told me to ask ftpmaster directly for more
information. I asked this in a polite email a month ago to ftpmaster
with no response at all.

> [2] http://people.debian.org/~terpstra/message/20040628.100711.6512a302.html

This email was primarily about the fact I should call you on the phone
since you refused to respond to email. I didn't think you would
appreciate that, and I also am low on money, so I didn't bother.

Finally, I would like to mention that part of Martin's platform was to
get various groups to communicate better, I have not personally seen
this happening perhaps I am just not looking on the right lists?


[3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2004/02/msg00463.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: