Re: "Why" Debian Core Consortium ? Why not UserLinux? Why not Debian?
Ian Murdock <imurdock@progeny.com> wrote:
> What does that mean exactly, "to talk to Debian"? The DPL is in
> the loop, plus a dozen or more Debian developers that work for the
> participating organizations.
At Debconf (so some time after news of the DCC had appeared), the DPL
denied having been approached about this. When was the DPL brought into
the loop?
> Debian is a group of individuals, so
> is involving some number of those individuals not
> "talking to Debian" in just about the only sense one can do that?
Oh, rubbish. There's a clear and traditional way of "talking to Debian"
- you raise the subject on one of the project's mailing lists.
Individual maintainers no more speak for Debian in general than I speak
for Ubuntu, Progeny or Linspire. The DPL is something of a special case,
but ought to be communicating with the rest of the developers in the
process.
> I for one would be delighted if this were to become an official
> Debian project, and we are indeed planning to work within the
> existing Debian framework to the largest extent possible. I
> just figured coming in *assuming* any of
> that as a forgone conclusion would be seen as presumptuous.
Maybe, but instead it looks like you've come in assuming that this is
something that should be done alongside Debian rather than within it.
Which is, uh, something that you seem to have been criticising Ubuntu
for.
If Debian makes a technical decision that is incompatible with business
decisions made by members of the DCC, will the DCC members remain
compatible with Debian even if it means losing out in certain markets?
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59-chiark.mail.debian.project@srcf.ucam.org
Reply to: