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

Re: Debian Project News 2011/06 frozen. Please review and translate

Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> Jeremiah Foster wrote:
>> Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>>>> href="http://packages.debian.org/network-manager";>network-manager</a></code>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00041.html";>could
>>>> be adopted</a>  to this end, though this proposal has provoked a great many
>>>> objections, whether
>>>> <a href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00051.html";>\
>>>> rational</a>  or<a href="http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00120.html";>\
>>>> less so</a>.
>>> I don't understand the link on "less so".
>> I think it is trying to highlight a "rational" argument (the first
>> link) and a "less than rational" argument, the second link. 
> Hum...yeah, but the second link is actually a post from Lars which
> is a "meta" sub-thread on how argumentation should be made. Lars
> writes explicitly that "I am not taking any stance for or against
> ifupdown, or even Network Manager."

I think the point of choosing this one to point at was exactly that
Lars was talking about the overemotional debate, but was not himself
being overemotional.  Pointing at a "NETWORKMANGLER MUST DIE" posting
and declaring it to be the irrational side of the debate would be too
much like taking a side.

(This is one of those cases where I would have been happy to edit the
draft if anybody had actually suggested a better alternative.)

>>>> As a side note, J&ouml;rg added that during the meeting Ansgar Burchardt was
>>>> promoted to FTP Assistant: congratulations, Ansgar!
> FTP assistant is not a job, so that leaves the more important or
> responsible rank. The sentence seems to imply that FTP assistant is
> a more important rank than whatever Ansgar was, probably a
> developer, but that is misleading, because Debian has no hierarchy
> tree. I would understand that DPL is considered more important than
> developer, but FTP assistant? This is a judgment from whoever wrote
> that paragraph.

The problem is (partly) that the "promotion" model would imply upward
movement from one role to another - in other words, that Ansgar was
now an FTP Assistant *instead of* a Debian Developer.

> The sentence was since changed to
>> As a side note, J&ouml;rg added that during the meeting Ansgar Burchardt was
>> appointed to the post of FTP Assistant; congratulations, Ansgar!
> but I never heard the word "post" that way in English. It seems to
> be used in the sense of "position". "poste" means that in French,
> but could a native English speaker confirm this is not a faux ami?

I'm the one who put it there, so I don't count as confirmation.  To
me it's valid but has the possible disadvantage that it tends to
imply uniqueness (there's only one FTP Assistant, and that's the post
Ansgar was appointed to).  Maybe I should have gone for "position"?
"Role"?  Or (with a minor reshuffle) "duties"?  None of these seem
like clear improvements, though.
JBR	with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
	sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package

Reply to: