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

Re: Distributing software written by hostile upstream developers

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:42:45PM +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> > In my opinion, the current recommendation in the developer
> > references is enough for now:

I concur.

> Different thing. This encourages the maintainer to think if he wants
> it. Now, what if the maintainer wants it (hey, some people might like
> some pain), but a huge group in Debian does not? The latter is what
> Steve tries to address, the dev-ref doesnt do any good there.

Still, I fail to see exactly how Steve was proposing to solve the
issue. He mentioned a vote, but to me the proposal was too vague to even
understand what we can vote about.

Actually, I don't even think we need a _general_ solution for the cases
you mention (which are at least a bit more precise enabling to
understand what we are talking about). In those cases indeed, we would
have a conflict between a single developer and the "developer
body". Cases like that are already supported by constitution per se by,
for instance, having a GR (or even appealing to CTTE FWIW).

One might think that the GR is "too public" and that can exacerbate the
battle between the project and the upstream author, but actually in all
past cases that come to my mind, the battle was already well known to
the big public.

So, can't we just stay put and say that, when new cases will arise, we
will vote about whether the project wants a specific software---due to
difficulties in dealing with a specific upstream---in the distro or not?

Do we really need something more than that?
Yet another procedure?


Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Dietro un grande uomo c'è ..|  .  |. Et ne m'en veux pas si je te tutoie
sempre uno zaino ...........| ..: |.... Je dis tu à tous ceux que j'aime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: