piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)
- To: email@example.com
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)
- From: lee <email@example.com>
- Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 18:18:01 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mail-followup-to: email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <20141008150137.GA29853@debian> (Jonathan Dowland's message of "Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:01:37 +0100")
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <20141007210717.GR1390@sid.nuvreauspam> <CAAr43iO9qZOVt9ThQqzWCvCYbdYMB7qj94Kkjdct34moiq+ZaQ@mail.gmail.com> <20141008091625.GV1390@sid.nuvreauspam> <CAAr43iNuvmx2gUxXZxoZnTUgSZzmbU8fkBVMoWGc9SQq+FZCrg@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20141008150137.GA29853@debian>
Jonathan Dowland <email@example.com> writes:
> The tech-ctte exploration was extremely thorough, entirely transparent and I
> cannot think of any example of a more transparent decision making process in
> any other Linux community. Not only that, but the entire decision could be
> overridden by a GR, which *any* developer could raise, at any time (and still
> can). And the eventual outcome wasn't "there will be one init system", which
> would be *considerably* easier for the project to manage, but that we support
> *multiple* init systems! A tremendously more complex task. Red Hat aren't doing
> that. Fedora aren't doing that. Ubuntu aren't doing that.
Why doesn't Debian just do a GR on this issue?
It would be interesting to see what the devs/maintainers would vote for,
and it might give everyone quite a bit a of re-assurance and
Perhaps just having a GR would ignore the established way of initiating
one and having it would create a case of precedence. I don't see how
that would be a problem, even less so since switching to a different
init system is, AFAIK, unprecedented in Debian.
Perhaps this is an issue for which to decide about the established ways
are not sufficient.
Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this issue be
a case in which significant concerns from/of the users about an issue
might initiate a GR? Wouldn't it speak loudly for Debian and its ways
and for what it stands for, or used to stand for, if it was established
procedure that issues arising significant concerns amongst the users can
lead to a GR?
I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
the users (here). And after all, we're all kinda stuck in the same
boat. A GR might have the potential to make the gap between users and
devs/maintainers a lot smaller. Otherwise, this gap will only continue
to become wider and wider.
Again we must be afraid of speaking of daemons for fear that daemons
might swallow us. Finally, this fear has become reasonable.