On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 03:01:48PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Andrew Suffield wrote: > > So, again, why is it there? Once we know what criteria should be used > > to determine what to point names under that domain at, then (and only > > then) can we decide what to point them at. If anything. It's quite > > possible that this CNAME should not exist at all. > > Excuse me, but the above paragraph is so much bureaucratic wanking. Looks like a normal decision making process to me. How do you make decisions, if not "Define desireable criteria, then select option based on those criteria"? The only other method I am aware of is random selection. > It was pretty clear at the time that we added that CNAME because it > seemed the way we could best serve our users. At the time it did not > seem that we could run our own irc servers, and there was a need for > debian users to get their irc client pointed someplace where they could > join a debian help channel. So, you are in support of creating CNAMEs under debian.org to any projects that we want to point users to, thusly giving them some appearence of official status? (If not, I look forward with interest to your explanation as to why this particular name is different). > Or of it satisfies your need for some document: The social contract > empowers us to act in the best interests of our users, blah blah blah. That's the kind of bullshit we expect from Lazarus Long. Really, you can use that line of reasoning to justify *anything*. Josip wants to make a political statement on behalf of the project. This should not be something we do lightly or at a whim. -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield : :' : http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing, `. `' | Imperial College, `- -><- | London, UK
Attachment:
pgprlTLB9xjGo.pgp
Description: PGP signature