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

Re: Proposition: 'NMU' upload of wxwidgets 2.8

On Feb 4, 2008 6:24 PM, Ron <ron@debian.org> wrote:

> Richard, please don't profess to speak for me -- especially not couched
> in terms such as "more or less".  There were several things that people
> tried to explain to you in that discussion that you 'more or less'
> refused to accept, so please don't muddy the waters further by spreading
> more misunderstanding.

I did not profess to speak for you, I am well aware you can do so,
What I did was summarize the proceedings of a discussion for the benefit
of the people who did not see it or even knew it took place. If both
sides, being mainly represented by you and me respectively, walk away
from a discussion unhappy, 'more or less' is a valid and helpful
qualifier that emphasizes the disagreement while not blaming either

That being said, let me address your points a last time as I fear we
are seeing the same patterns that have led into the current situation.

Namely, a total block of any progress related to wxwidgets 2.8, no
matter how many other packages would depend on it or have not even been
ITP'ed because of the 2.8 situation (I know of several).

>  1) People who have an interest in 2.8 contact Ron to work together.
> As we discussed, as I've said previously, and as Myon already announced
> once again, lets just start with this step shall we.  We can let the
> people actually doing the work make judgements on where it will go from
> there -- once some work actually gets done and is suitably reviewed.

To quote myself for the benefit of people reading this mail:

> 2) People are free to upload 2.8 as a separate package without him
>    minding the fact that his namespace is impacted, as he does not
>    currently plan to package 2.8 anyway, preferring to wait for 3.0.

To quote Myon:

< Myon> RichiH, Ron: I think we are seeing a classical case of talking
cross purposes
< Myon> so let's step back and see if people will actually do stuff
< Myon> RichiH: let's accept Ron's word that he's trying people to
help. The "problem" now is that he does BTS-cleaning by closing bugs
which annoyed some people. Good faith, bad impression
< Myon> or something, I don't think there's anything left to discuss
now and here
< Myon> we just need someone (Ron and/or others) to do the work

This implies both option 1) and 2).
Option 2) was the consensus of the majority of people involved in
#debian-devel at this time, by my count.

> I don't think many people were in agreement with your proposal that this
> should be some sort of open-slather free for all.  It is going to take
> quite an investment of time and effort for anyone who wants to attempt
> this to get (and more importantly, keep) it in a state where it might
> become part of the distro.

After going through my logs once more, I can say that that more people
were in favour of 'If it's not packaged, there is no way to actually
find out how it impacts Debian' and 'If someone is not willing to do
the work, someone else needs to be found', contrary to what you claim.

You imply that it is either you controlling all effort towards a goal
you do not want to achieve or an anarchistic congregation of people,
everyone commited to make things break. I resent that implication.
Especially as there are packages, created by other DDs, that work just
fine, at least for me and others I talked to.

> But anyone who thinks they are up for that, is indeed most welcome to
> get in touch with myself and the others who've shown an interest to
> date, to co-ordinate what they would like to do and how best to do it.
> I don't think having some random number of people acting in isolation
> will be sufficient to turn this into something usable.  If they exist,
> they need to get together and all help each other.

As you can see in your bug reports, several people claimed to be willing to
package outside of your control.

The main problem I see is that while you state you want to want to wait
for 3.0 and not package 2.8 at all, you still claim the right to
coordinate each and every effort to do just this, as can be seen by your
reply to grand-parent mail.  The only public effort in this direction I
could see is you removing all blocks from the RFP bug on wxwidgets 2.6

This has a chilling effect on potential uploaders, especially as this
situation needs something close to a NMU.

> Y'all know where to find us if you feel the itch.

Actually, at least I only know where to find you. Any other people you
are saying are working with you did not pipe up, yet.

In any case, this discussion is becoming pointless. The call for people
to upload this outside of your control has gone out, both on this list
and via private email. People will either follow it or not. I wouldi
just ask you to not try to keep others from doing the work you
repeatedly said you were unwilling to do.

If I do not reply to a potential reply by you, please do not
misunderstand this as an agreement from my side. I simply think that
everything that can be said has been said and consider further
discussion with you moot. We are unable to agree on a course of action
and that is OK. Now it is for other's to take this up, or not.

Best regards,

PS: If anyone reading this list who was not present during the
discussion wants to confirm any claims and counter-claims made, the log
file of the discussion is available by off-list request.

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=195;bug=403237

Reply to: