Re: Announcement: Debian Pure Blends news
Andreas Tille wrote:
> Your remark above just ignores that the concept tries to profit from
> synergies inside these projects which for instance are reflected in
> these tasks or bugs pages, a common technique to build metapackages etc.
that's not my point; my point is that i don't see why a bunch of teams
in Debian that make use of a common set ot tools/technics/$whatever
should, just because of the fact that they use this common set, be
carrying a special and confusing *different* name than the other teams
or in other words: probably every team is using/sharing some piece of
tools/technics/$whatever with another team or that another team uses too
- overlapping is always good and often happens. so why make some teams
special and name them different?
> If we now would be able to continue *working* for the concept and
> stop spending time criticising the name itself (the time for this is
> over as I tried to explain) or the renaming process in general which
> is definitely a waste of time I would be really happy.
again no offence intendet, but this is why this comes up all the time:
you discuss something on your sub-project internal mailinglist that
nobody else except sub-project members reads, then you guys decide on
something, and present the result on d-d-a. since the topic is far
broader and covers more people than just the already existing
sub-projects, all other people do feel the need to discuss this as
*they* see it the first time (through the d-d-a posting). the excact
same situation happened when you announced 'dish' at debconf.
to avoid such things, especially with defining naming terminology for
things that covers such broad aspects of debian, a poll on your
sub-project only mailinglists is probably not enough, and imho at least
one of either d-devel or d-project should be CC'ed too to get peoples
awareness *in the first place* and right at the beginning of the
decission making, and not at the end.
Address: Daniel Baumann, Burgunderstrasse 3, CH-4562 Biberist