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

Re: AGPL request for summary of recent discussion



On 02/09/13 12:14, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Paul Wise <pabs <at> debian.org> writes:
>> Likewise. I don't appreciate the disrespectful tone some folks have
>> displayed in this and other recent threads. I would like to remind
> 
> Oh great, and who’s going to deal with trolls then? You’re not
> holding Francesco to them, I’m noticing.

I think there's a few mails in the archive from me on those lines, but I
usually contact people off-list with such specific criticisms.
Basically, I feel it's a minor problem because Francesco seems polite if
repetitive - although I think this thread started because someone
doesn't follow the list closely, so I'm not sure if that got noticed!

> I’ve heard that Francesco is the reason people are considering
> unsubscribing from this list. Yes, it’s *that* bad. [...]

Well, we "hear" things like that every time someone doesn't agree about
whether software follows the DFSG or not, yet the number of subscribers
seems to be generally increasing towards some asymptote
http://lists.debian.org/stats/debian-legal.png

There are solutions short of unsubscribing, such as filtering, if you
really cannot stand to hear certain voices.  So far, I think I've
filtered three people out during 10 years.  The conduct on this list has
improved over time, but it could always improve further, of course.

> (And, for the record, I did try to make constructive suggestions
> how Francesco can try to get his point across better.)

I noticed a suggestion that Francesco should work to become a DD because
he's "not even a Debian Developer!" which seems a bit of a throwback to
the "non-package-maintaining contributors not welcomed" dark ages.  Even
as someone in it, I feel most of the project is moving beyond a
keyring-cabal mentality.

I also noticed a suggestion that Francesco should shut up and then try
to convince the project about the problems with the AGPL "from
within"(huh?), which seemed rather absurdly destructive to me: how does
someone convince others without explaining the problems?

Both of those were in close proximity to some quite sharp words.

Were there other suggestions I didn't notice?  If not, I think we may
have different understandings of "constructive".

> Sorry I’m brutally honest. And yes, I stand by my actions.

No need to be sorry about honesty: please be sorry for not being polite
and collaborative, or at least not being clear.

> And, tbh, if this is official (someone finally says something
> against a long-standing annoyment, to the rejoicing of other
> people including DDs who suffered under said annoyment, only
> to be flamed by people who have failed to contribute so far)
> I can understand unsubscribing. It’s “only” Debian that suffers.

I'm sorry that you feel flamed.  That was not my intent.

I regret that my debian contributions over recent years have been
smaller than I'd like, for various reasons mostly related to working on
other projects, but I feel pabs (maintains over thirty packages, does QA
uploads and NMUs, sponsors over forty more) has contributed well, so
listen to pabs if that's your criteria.

Regards,
-- 
MJ Ray (slef)
http://people.debian.org/~mjr/


Reply to: