Re: merged /usr
>>>>> "Marco" == Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT> writes:
Marco> This is a legitimate but very minor goal which could also be
Marco> achieved by changing dpkg.
I'm focus on your statement because I think you'll take the time to
consider what I have to say even if you ultimately disagree. I think
statements like the above escalate tension ain situations where we don't
want that.
It's obvious that different participants in the discussion prioritize
the goals differently.
It's really frustrating when you describe a goal that is important to
someone else as "very minor" or something similar.
It will instantly escalate tension.
Please respect the other participants by not trying to de-legitimize
their viewpoint.
It's fine to try and argue for project goals or goals of a sub group.
If Debian has decided that goal is "very minor," then I think your
statement would be less likely to escalate if you'd say that.
(In this instance I suspect Debian has explicitly decided no such
thing. Implicitly I agree that we have not chosen to wait for dpkg to
get fixed before moving forward on merged /usr. For a variety of
reasons I'd be happy to go into I don' think that is the same as Debian
deciding the goal is "very minor.")
If you think that goal is "very minor," then it's fine to say that. But
without qualifying the statement, you come across as placing your
opinion as fact, and in my experience that frustrates the people that
disagree with you. And when there is frustration, these threads get
longer.
Thanks for considering my thoughts here,
Reply to: