I take this message from Manoj as an opportunity: > Hi, > > Inadvertently, a draft copy of an email written in anger, and > not meant to be actually sent, was sent to the mailing list, instead > of a more reasoned response. > > For that I apologize. You may see from the second response what > I meant to be public response, and the first email was meant to be a > release of my temper and angst; and certainly not fit fodder for a > public mailing list. Ack. Thanks for this, Manoj. I think that, in the very long threads that are currently cluttering up -devel, we would benefit from most participants to cool down and consider moving from the extreme positions I've seen when overreading the threads. Actually, these threads would indeed benefit a lot from a general summary by the thread initiator. My current short view of them: - situation of new source packages format: I haven't followed that one very much. It seems extinct as of now. Could lead to a summary (or I may have missed it). - ddebs: the situation seems fairly balanced between people who feel the need for a separate namespace by extension and those who think this is not necessary. The general need for automatically built debug pacakages does not seem to be questioned strongly (but I may have missed something: I certainly haven't read all thread branches, particularly when people were called names..:-)) - Standards field: I feel like there is a quite wide opposition to the initial proposal to deprecate the field. The debate quickly slipped into a debate between people who give a big importance to that field and do careful checks on their package for conformance (en?)....and people, particularly from teams with a high package load, who think this is not sustainable. I'm not sure we can make much more progress here. That ends up in useless thread branches where it is suggested that very valuable developers are doing a bad job which is certainly counter-productive.
Description: Digital signature