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

Thank you for responding



Gentlemen, thank you for responding.  Of the fourteen requests I sent
to move this discussion to debian-project, which is "chartered" for
this type of intercourse, you were the only ones who replied.

I don't know whether I'll keep up the effort to make these kinds
of requests, since there are so many who would rather hit >reply<
and blast away than to include an a well-reasoned rebuttal an
editing of the To: || Cc: field of devel^H^H^H^H^Hproject.

brian moore wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 05:05:42PM -0500, Bolan Meek wrote:
> > brian moore wrote:
> > >...
> > > No, the royalty payment is demanded for encoders ...
> >
> > How about next time ...

> How about I do that better and just procmail the whole thing into
> /dev/null?

If everyone would discuss this in -project, you shouldn't need to
adjust your recipes, because -devel wouldn't get cluttered by it.

> If the people arguing are stupid enough to believe that a Free mp3
> player exists, they're not worth arguing with.

The issue is much bigger than MP3 facilities.  But everyone's favorite
toy or ideal stimulates strong emotions when threatened.

> ...

Jeff Teunissen wrote:
> 
> Bolan Meek wrote:

> > Jeff Teunissen wrote:

> > > The QPL satisfies the DFSG. ... So what's the problem here?
> >
> > How about next time ...

> My message was not relevant to the removal of non-free, and I exclusively
> responded to the mistaken claim that QPL software was banned from Debian or
> something.

The message thread nonetheless belongs in -project, and not in -devel. 
My
method, for the sake of efficiency, was to reply to the individual, and
read the actual message later.  The issue of QPL isn't so much an issue
of the development of Debian packages, the supposed topic of -devel.

> ...

Raul Miller wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 04:53:17PM -0500, Bolan Meek wrote:
> > Raul Miller wrote:

> > > Sure there is -- if you don't mind introducing a wrapper ...
> >
> > How about next time ...

> Are you suggesting that this post of mine was not about a development
> issue?

Not merely suggesting, but pointing out, as in the quote including a
snip
from http://www.debian.org/MailingLists (again, below).  -devel is
supposed
to be a forum for the discussing of technical issues of developing
Debian
packages, -project is supposed to be for political issues of developing
Debian overall.

In fact, it will have to eventually go to -vote.  I'll try to identify
those on each side of the issue over the next two weeks, and request
among the developers in each camp that they compose a summary case
among themselves for posting to -vote.  I don't get to vote yet,
not yet being accepted as a developer (my application is only a week
old, so far...), but maybe I can contribute as a facilitator in this.

Gentlemen, did it do any good for me to quote the aforementioned page?
Is everyone so stuck in whatever first way he has adopted that he will
have an automatic knee-jerk against an exhortation to change?
Will it do any good for me to continue to urge moving this to -project,
or am I merely quixotically tilting at windmills?

(At the risk of boorish repetition:)
snips from
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/subscribe :
...
debian-user
	This is the main mailing list for all users and developers of
	Debian GNU/Linux systems. Many developers also follow
	the threads and step in to help every now and then. 
		Moderated: no     Subscription: open 
...
debian-vote
	Proposals, discussions and announcements related to Official
	Debian Votes. 
		Moderated: no     Subscription: open 
...
debian-project
	Debian project related non-technical (i.e. political,
	organizational, etc.) discussions. 
		Moderated: no     Subscription: open 
...
debian-devel
	This is the main discussion list for development topics. All
	developers should be subscribed to this list. As it is open to
	the public anyone can join the discussion. 
		Moderated: no     Subscription: open 
	debian-devel-digest is a read-only, digestified version. 
...

(At the risk of outright _rude_ repetition:)
Bolan Meek wrote:
> 
> Buddha Buck wrote:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David N. Welton [mailto:davidw@linuxcare.com]
> > > ...
> > >
> > > There is actually a list for these kinds of meta-project discussions:
> > > debian-project.  It was lame for the origianl poster not to post
> > > there, in my opinion.
> >
> > I disagree.  While debian-project exists, it isn't known to every developer
> > or other interested party (like myself).  A proposal to do something as
> > broadreaching as amending the Social Contract needs to be discussed in as
> > wide a forum as possible.
> 
> Your disagreement was based on previous ignorance of the availability
> and topic of the debian-project list.  Since you now know, you ought to
> agree.
> 
> >From the http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/subscribe page, accessible
> via
> the home page (edited only for formatting):
> 
>         ...
>         debian-project
>                 Debian project related non-technical (i.e. political,
>                 organizational, etc.) discussions.
>                         Moderated: no     Subscription: open
>         ...
>         debian-devel
>                 This is the main discussion list for development topics.
>                 All developers should be subscribed to this list.
>                 As it is open to the public anyone can join the discussion.
>                         Moderated: no     Subscription: open
>         ...
> 
> debian-project is as open as debian-user, and anyone who wants to
> follow,
> and/or comment on, this issue ought to do so in debian-project.  An
> announce-
> ment in debian-devel and debian-user should be sufficient.  I'm
> interested
> in the debate (currently I'm anti-"get rid of non-free", but pro-"valid
> proposal:
> vote on it"), but I'd like debian-devel to stay free for development
> issues,
> and debian-user to stay free for the topic of using Debian.



Reply to: