Re: why hijacking is bad (and salvaging is good) Re: Orphaning php-codesniffer, then take it over by the PHP PEAR team
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Freitag, 1. Juni 2012, Steve Langasek wrote:
> [...]
>> This is very different from what some people mean when they use the word
>> hijack. In part, I think we have a terminological problem here; I don't
>> know if it's a matter of non-native speakers using the word differently,
>> but the word "hijack" clearly refers to a /hostile act/. By definition,
>> anything that could legitimately be called a hijack should not be
>> permitted; and anything that we believe should be permitted should not be
>> referred to as "hijacking". Otherwise, people will infer that all kinds
>> of
>> inappropriate and hostile behavior is ok when it shouldn't be.
>>
>> And when people *do* engage in that kind of hostile behavior, yes, I think
>> it should be referred to the TC and we should disapprove of it. But when
>> people are taking reasonable steps to confirm that a package is abandoned
>> before taking it over - let's call this "salvage" - I have no problem with
>> that; it should be encouraged and supported.
I kinda like "Package reappropriation" myself :)
>
> thanks for explaining, makes completly sense to me now! :-)
>
> (And I do think it's partly a language issue. For non-native speakers "hijack"
> is probably a bit more romantic and less obviously evil 8-)
>
>
> cheers,
> Holger
>
> (And for those poor people (should they exist...) just reading my mail and not
> Steve's and thus having no idea what is ment with "salvaging a package": go
> read Steve's mail.)
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: [🔎] 201206012222.16740.holger@layer-acht.org">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 201206012222.16740.holger@layer-acht.org
>
--
All programmers are playwrights, and all computers are lousy actors.
#define sizeof(x) rand()
:wq
Reply to: