Re: [Summary] Discourse for Debian
On April 14, 2020 9:42:33 PM UTC, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote:
>>>>>> "Ihor" == Ihor Antonov <ihor@antonovs.family> writes:
>
>
>
> Ihor> I want to leave this as is without final verdict. Everyone
> Ihor> should make their own.
>
>I really appreciate the idea of summarizing the thread; I agree with
>you
>it has gotten long.
>
>A good summary is one where people on all sides of the issue will look
>at the summary and say that yes, that looks good.
>
>I strongly suspect you've missed there.
>I think more of your personal bias comes through into this summary
>than
>would be ideal.
>
>Also, for each item, you put it in one category, even when some people
>think it is a pro and some people think it is a con.
>
>
>So, I think that the approach you're going for--summarize the
>discussion
>and see where we stand--is good,
>it would be valuable to try and paint things in a much less biased way
>so that:
>
>* People who said things look at your summary and say "that's what I
> said"
>
>* People who disagree with those things look at your summary and say
> "yep, my disagreement is represented."
Sam,
I think you've missed the mark here, except perhaps the why another service section at the end.
Personally I'm in the "I think it's unsuitable for Debian" camp and I see my concerns represented. I also see several items where I agree it's a claimed advantage, but I don't think it really is.
No summary is perfect. I think this one is pretty good (even the parts I disagree with - it does summarize the discussion).
Scott K
Reply to: