Re: Goodbye, all!
>
> Graeme Stewart
> > I'm sure that many of us are very concerned about the future of Debian
> > re. what we have read.
>
> I am.
I'm not.
> > I really hope that it succeeds, in fact I hope to contribute to its
> > success, but my _perception_ at the moment is of technical secrets being
> > kept from users (re. XFree3.1) and of possibly dark and unpleasent
> > personal problems dammaging the distribution's development.
Agreed that there is the perception that the development effort has been
keeping a secret from us that we should have been made aware of. That's the
*perception* at least.
However, my belief in Debian and what is stands for is, largely, unshaken.
On the other hand, I should point out that Nixon's real crime was in trying
to *cover up* watergate. In light of that, I would recommend that, now that
the leak has happened, that there be a full disclosure of what the whole
deal was about to begin with.
Specifically, I'd like to see someone address:
o How close did Debian 1.2 come to being released after the X 3.1 bug was
known?
o Who was in favor of releasing it with X 3.1 and why?
o Who was in favor of waiting, and why?
o Who has resigned as a result of all of this and what did they control?
As a final note, I'd like to cast my vote in the stability/security vs.
prompt-release debate. I personally, and I'd presume a large majority of
other users out there, really don't mind waiting an extra few weeks in
exchange for a release that's substantially more secure.
However, I'll also point out that I have only ever tried to put X on a
Debian system *once* and even *that* one didn't work. So, the X 3.1 hole
doesn't affect me at all. Perhaps we can release everything except the
X 3.1... with the understanding that the X 3.2 package will be forthcoming
in a week or two.
- Joe
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com
Reply to: