Bug#210879: Reopen: revise odd language in 'constitution.txt' -- "K Developers" ... "not integers"

["Alfie Costa" <agcosta@gis.net>]

reopen 210879 ! 

thanks 

On 30 Nov 2003, at 14:04, Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:

> Hello.

Hello.

> The objections are because there isn't a problem here. Everyone knows how
> it's to be interpreted, 

I like your tagline.  Have you ever read your own tagline?

AT's Tagline:> I don't speak for anyone save myself.

But why are you telling me what "everyone knows", (bah!), if you only speak for 
yourself?  

> If you can't persuade people that this is a problem, learn to live with it. 

It's a question of the burden of proof.  I'd say when sides don't agree, the 
bugs should be left open.  If the maintainers and users can't agree about a 
bug, that's what the 'wontfix' tag was made for.  If anyone is unfamiliar with 
or has forgotten that tag, here's a description:  

"wontfix

  "This bug won't be fixed. Possibly because this is a choice between two 
arbitrary ways of doing things and the maintainer and submitter prefer 
different ways of doing things, possibly because changing the behaviour will 
cause other, worse, problems for others, or possibly for other reasons."
	
	http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#tags

Leaving a controversial bug open is painless, and if it's not, the the BTS 
software or its various frontends should be fixed to make it painless.  

> If you can't do that either, use a different distribution.

"Shut up, go awaaay..." you're saying.  Controversy is necessary to any group, 
or it stagnates.  Also not everyone in Debian is as overbearing as the guys 
replying to this bug.  

> Bug closed with this message...

I'm not much good at obedience, matey...