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

Re: Bug#775436: ITP: xlennart -- An XBill fork but with Lennart and SystenD instead of Bill and Wingdows


On 16/01/15 09:48 AM, Dmitry Yu Okunev wrote:
> Is it really necessary to discuss this on debian-devel@? IMHO, it's
> local issue, yet… And also please sorry for my English skills.

It's an ITP, so it goes to debian-devel by default to discuss amongst
ourselves whether a package is suitable to enter Debian or not. So yes,
it's a necessary part of the process.

> On 01/16/2015 03:48 PM, Ben Armstrong wrote:
>> Do you honestly not see the difference between poking fun at an
>> upstream that is at the center of an ongoing controversy vs. poking
>> fun at a competitor? 
> 1. Everybody (who doesn't like systemd) already resigned, IMHO. There's
> already no "controversy".

We'll have to agree to disagree here. I still see lots of systemd hate
on irc from certain users, and not just loons. Also, I see it every now
and then on the mailing lists and in blogs as well, and it will be a
while before that fire goes out. I expect another flare-up again
immediately after Jessie is released.

> 2. So you don't mind to add this package in future, right?
> So, I can't tell for Stephan Seitz (who you asked), but I don't see
> difference between "XLennart" and "XBill" in ethical and practical meanings.

I can envision a time in the future when it's no longer too soon for
this kind of joke, yes.

>> I personally don't care for the satire in this case and don't think it's
>> constructive for the project.
> "The project" is Debian?


>> Is it worth the expenditure of project
>> resources, even if ever so small, to allow a "joke package" (and a bad
>> joke, at that, and hopefully one with limited shelf life), which throws
>> oil on the fire?
> 1. You mean Debian infrastructure resources (like HDD space on Debian
> mirrors)?

And the human cost: ftpmaster team's time, and security team's time, and
QA team's time, and the release team's time ...

> 2. As I said above, there no "oil on the fire". However I may be wrong,
> of course.

I think you are wrong. However, I may be wrong, too. :)

>> Where does it stop? A separate x<nameofsatiricaltarget>
>> package per person whom some subset of users holds accountable for
>> "ruining Linux"? How does this package make Debian better?
> 2 packages for 20 years is not too much. Why this should be stopped?
> It's a part of history. This game represents very loud, long and
> interesting moment in FOSS history. And it represents an essential
> culture subset of nowadays FOSS community. So Debian will be better for
> this people. If there's nobody from DD will agree with it, then the
> package just won't be sponsored. I don't see any problem.
> How does XBill make Debian better?

Once it's "history" and not "present", sure. And by "stop" I don't mean
active suppression of xlennart's existence (or writing of new satire),
just rampant explosion of multiple redundant packages in Debian, each
serving the same basic purpose with trivial differences from the last. I
don't think this is a good trend.

>> I'd also object on the technical grounds that we already have xbill and
>> the changes in xlennart don't truly justify a fork.
> This could be easily solved by merging xbill with xlennart to "xperson"
> with collection of this people (bill and lennart).

Sure, after the joke is no longer too soon, I'd have no problem with
that (or even keep the original name "xbill" for continuity with its
long history, but that's something upstream can judge best).


Reply to: