On Mon, Nov 04, 2002 at 06:06:44PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> -A *DRAFT* joint recommendation of the the Technical Committee, the
> -Project Leader and the Bug Tracking System Administrators.
> +A *DRAFT* joint recommendation of the the Technical Committee, and the
> +Project Leader.
Well, perhaps Ian will include this change in his next draft.
> Anyway, if following the proposed "disputes between developers guidelines"
> isn't enough to get the disputes about the document itself resolved,
> it's obviously not good enough as is.
I've done my best to abide by the principles in the document as I
understand them in the course of my conversation with Ian. He is
unwilling to deal with me and cites only subjective grounds for the
foundation of his decision.
In my personal opinion, that stance fails to live up to the goals
expressed in his draft.
> If that's the case, maybe someone who is afraid of disagreeing with Ian
> -- even though they'd already have the unsubtle precedent of both Branden
> and Manoj -- could speak up, and we could use that information to write a
> *better* document about resolving disputes. Personally, I haven't noticed
> Debian types to be particularly afraid of dissin' authority figures.
>
> Given no evidence to assume that it is, though, maybe we shouldn't leap
> to it as a conclusion just yet?
I hadn't reached it as a conclusion ("I can think of several other
explanations, which are not mutually exclusive", "maybe"). I proposed
it as plausible explanatory factor, and not even necessarily the sole
one in operation.
Maybe a GR really is the best way to go; we may find out that we can't
even muster quorum on the issue, and that Ian, Manoj, and I have all
inflated notions of the importance of this issue. Maybe most developers
are willing to put up with the flamewars we have.
--
G. Branden Robinson |
Debian GNU/Linux | If ignorance is bliss,
branden@debian.org | is omniscience hell?
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
pgp8v5eKvi3AG.pgp
Description: PGP signature