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

Re: Reforming the NM process

On 21 Apr 2006, Panu Kalliokoski uttered the following:

> My main point is: we would do well to follow the same principle of
> openness everywhere that we do on our mailing lists and BTS.  I
> don't think it would hurt Debian.  Voting is also a way to make
> contribution, and a much less dangerous one than the ability to send
> mail to a broad-audience mailing list.

        This is where we differ. A mail sent is just that -- an
 email. Even a package upload can be reverted or superseded, and while
 it can be a serious issue, it is reversible.  Getting a say in how
 the project behaves in the future, or how the foundation documents
 are modified -- there lies the core of the project, and anyone who
 gets to have a say in it must have demonstrated something more than
 mere contribution of free software: commitment, demonstrated
 responsibility, and trustworthiness.

        In my opinion, voting requires far more responsibility and
 judgement than maintaining a bunch of packages.

Real Users are afraid they'll break the machine -- but they're never
afraid to break your face.
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: