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

Re: Honesty in Debian (was Re: Amendment to GR on GFDL, and the changes to the Social Contract

Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com> [...]
> Anyway, there are *still* packages which fail to list the licenses for 
> some of their files (beyond even /usr/share/doc/*/copyright) in 
> /usr/share/doc/*/copyright.
> Emacs21 is the classic example; but since its maintainers clearly don't 
> give a damn about the Social Contract *or* Policy, I guess it's a poor 
> example.

If you have not perfected telepathy, you can't tell for sure what
its maintainers do or don't give a damn about, so please don't
make such wild claims.

I'm not 100% sure, but a message about bug disputes to -devel
on Mon, 4 Apr 2005 01:09:56 -0700 from Don Armstrong said:
   If you're sure that the bug should actually be upgraded,
   then discuss it on -devel, and get rough consensus, which
   should then convince the maintainer. If not, proceed to the
   ctte or similar as a last resort.

I guess getting consensus from -devel about FDL won't happen any
time soon, and the bug looks the right severity anyway, but maybe
-release would lend a hand about maintainers denying an RC bug.

Keep raising it higher until it is fixed well (maybe send a
patch), or you don't think it's worth chasing any more (but I
believe you are tenacious), or you are told definitively that
your head is on backwards (and I believe you are humble enough
to admit mistakes).

-project is for "non-technical topics". Raising an emacs21 bug
here will probably not help fix it. If you want to use it as
an example, just mention http://bugs.debian.org/207932 and let
people draw their own conclusions about its maintainer and the
other "let all unmodifiables into main" campaigners there.

My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: