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

Re: Proposed change to Debian constitution

On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 11:51:33PM -0500, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> Robert Woodcock <rcw@debian.org> writes:
> > On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 07:07:54PM -0500, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
> > > OK.  Whose fault is it?
> > With all due respect, I don't believe it matters.
> The only thing that matters of itself is that new developers get added
> promptly.


> In a democratic organization, two other things matter: first, people
> have a right to accountability from those they elect, and second,
> people have a right to know who NOT to elect in the future.

`Elect' ?

Interesting concept.

Kind of implies having so many people willing and able to do a job that
we've got to cull some of them.

It'd be nice if that were the case.
> To make those judgments, people have the right to at least an
> explanation of the problem (which has not been forthcoming) or the

There aren't enough people doing work. The people who understand how to
get this right are busy.

Saying `hey, you suck at new-maintainering' and other junk isn't exactly
the best way to encourage them to work on it, either.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG encrypted mail preferred.

 ``The thing is: trying to be too generic is EVIL. It's stupid, it 
        results in slower code, and it results in more bugs.''
                                        -- Linus Torvalds

Attachment: pgpHIIqwcJTmM.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: