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

Re: where do NEW packages go?



On Sat, May 18, 2002 at 11:45:00PM -0500, Adam Heath wrote:
> On Sun, 19 May 2002, Jeroen Dekkers wrote:
> 
> > Joined the cabal, you mean? You probably see it different because you
> > are part of some groups, but this is how I see it. You still didn't
> > manage to show it's different. It would be nice if reality was different...
> 
> When I became part of owner@bugs, it was different than most groups in Debian.
> Darren Benham had made debbugs the software into a deb, and was converting
> master over to it.  He asked for volunteers to be on owner@bugs, and I
> responded.  I believe Josip and Anthony came on later, but I am not certain of
> the circumstances.

It doesn't really matter how it was created, it matters what is is today.
 
> For dpkg, I started going thru the bugs filed against it, and sending patches.
> I did this at a high rate, until Wichert gave me cvs write access.
> 
> It wasn't until much later that I started actually adding new features to
> these 2 software packages, and doing major fixes(no need to list them, they
> don't matter for this discussion).
> 
> All I am suggesting is that you do the same.  Fix current issues, even if they
> are not something that interests you currently.  Keep fixing problems.  Do it
> without complaining.  This will earn you the trust that you desire.

Are just so smart that you got all patches right without discussion,
or is there just some secret document which describe the steps to get
an idea discussed?

> > > The software these groups use is all available for everyone to see, so others
> > > can figure out how it works, if they are willing.  However, what generally
> > > happens is that some outside group sees something not occuring to their
> > > liking, and then the following happens:
> > >
> > > s = statement, a = answer
> > >
> > > s: foo is broken, let's fix it.
> > >  a: no it's not, it works fine.
> > > s: yes it is
> > >  a: <no answer, silence>
> > > time passes
> > > s: I can help, how do I help?
> > >  a: <silence>  -- this happens because those doing the work are too busy to
> > >     spoon feed everyone, and some have been burned in the past doing just
> > >     this.
> > >  a: Look <here>, <there>, and <the other place>, and learn how it works.
> > > s: <suddnely no more offers of help>
> >
> > Read the mail from Marcus to Manoj how it really goes. I know about 3
> > cases that it happened like Marcus described: arch handling, bts arch
> > tags and apt-i18n. I guess there are more where I don't know about.
> 
> All these tools are complex, and used by all of Debian.  They are very
> critical to the function of this organization.  Modifying them needs to be
> done carefully, with lots of testing.

True. That's why you need feedback from the developers of those tools
before writing patches, because it's likely you do it wrong. If you
never get that feedback, you can never implement the feature you
want. If it's a low priority item for the developers too, it probably
never gets implemented. That's why I call it a cabal.

> I am invovled with dpkg and a little with apt(the arch handling), the bts arch
> tags(also, by extension, version tags), and a little with apt(for apt-il8n).
> 
> I've seen all these discussions.  They have generally been "Here's a patch for
> this new feature, add it, now."  They(those who have made patches, or started
> discussions) have not followed the above procedures.  So, when they do speak
> up, they are summarily ignored.

Are they told the procedures? Are those written down somewhere? You
can't just think that everybody knows them, AFAIK it isn't part of the
NM process. Maybe it would be good to add this...
 
> > Is this your only argument? So we have to stop developping because
> > some other part is in a freeze for a few months? This is ridiculous.
> 
> No, you don't have to stop developing.  I never said that, nor implied it.
> You just can't expect others to be concerned with your personal ideas about
> the universe right now.

True. But I don't see why they can't add those packages to the
override file or give somebody of Debian GNU/Hurd access to it so he
can do it for the Hurd port. I think there are at least some
developers who already have earned enough respect to do this.
 
> > > No, you don't change the whole to make the part fit it.  You change the part
> > > to fit in with the whole.
> > >
> > > Someone here has backwards thinking.
> >
> > Someone thinks adding an OS in Debian is the same as adding the 25th editor.
> 
> There is no comparison.  You making the above stmt says enough about your
> thinking process.

No, I want to show you how you think. People keep telling 'the Hurd
should be ported to Debian instead of Debian to the Hurd'. The fact is
that the Hurd isn't our next new editor, but GNU/Hurd is a complete
other OS. That's kind of a difference.

I can also tell it on your level, if you understand that better: You
are just too stupid to understand the difference between our next new
editor and new OS in Debian. (Well, I agree that with emacs it's not
really that clear :-)

> > You claim it's at a worse time. I say that this is already going on
> > for 3 years.
> 
> It hasn't been.

Have you actually ever read arch-handling.txt? It was written in
1999.

> > No. At least when I came to the Hurd, they treated me as their
> > equal. As someone who could improve their software. From the first
> > day, they treated me with respect. Even when I have a totally
> > different opinion or say something really stupid, they still get
> > respect.
> >
> > A few months ago somebody mailed to debian-hurd with a problem with
> > windows. He was treated with respect and somebody pointed him to the
> > microsoft website and somebody else said something humorous. We, Hurd
> > developers, who think non-free software is immoral, even treated
> > somebody who wrote to the wrong mailinglist about a problem using
> > non-free software with respect.
> >
> > When I came to Debian, I wanted to fix the problems of the Hurd
> > port. I subscribed to debian-devel, lurked for a while and then gave
> > my opinion about some subjects. I immediately got flamed about
> > that. And then everytime I wanted to start a discussion about
> > something, I got treated like a fool, because I'm having a different
> > opinion. And I still am treated like that.
> >
> > Do you see the difference between the Hurd community and the Debian
> > community?
> 
> Debian is bigger than hurd.  What happens in one small little sector has
> different procedures than the entire galaxy.

Are you sure? GNU/Hurd = the GNU system, started 7 years (or more?)
before Debian was started or Linux was created. There have been more
developers hacking on that than on Debian.

But we were just talking about respect here, not about procedures. So
care to explain why I don't get respect in the Debian community and I
do get respect in the GNU community?

> > > This is all common sense, which it appears that you are severly lacking.
> >
> > If you continue with personal attacks, I'll start with it too.
> 
> I wasn't the one who started.

Your first mail:
"But, I shouldn't say more, as it may clue you in on what I am talking
about here.  You should find out for yourself."

I parse that as "You are just stupid and don't know where you are
talking about, maybe you will find it out when you grew up".

Jeroen Dekkers
-- 
Jabber ID: jdekkers@jabber.org  IRC ID: jeroen@openprojects
GNU supporter - http://www.gnu.org

Attachment: pgpmpy5RbUVRn.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: