Re: piece of mind (Re: Moderated posts?)
Olav Vitters <olav@vitters.nl> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 06:18:01PM +0200, lee wrote:
>> Considering that the users are Debians' priority, couldn't this issue be
>> a case in which significant concerns from/of the users about an issue
>> might initiate a GR? Wouldn't it speak loudly for Debian and its ways
>> and for what it stands for, or used to stand for, if it was established
>> procedure that issues arising significant concerns amongst the users can
>> lead to a GR?
>>
>> I'm sure we could find quite a few supporters for having a GR amongst
>> the users (here). And after all, we're all kinda stuck in the same
>> boat. A GR might have the potential to make the gap between users and
>> devs/maintainers a lot smaller. Otherwise, this gap will only continue
>> to become wider and wider.
>
> Debian is known for focussing a lot on focussing on quality. Upgrading
> from one version to the next is expected to be utterly smooth. Any bug
> encountered is exceptional. While in some other distributions an upgrade
> might sometimes result in problems or is not even really supported very
> well, Debian has a great focus on ensuring that the stable release is
> utterly stable.
>
> If you encounter problems there are known ways to have a great deal of
> influence: file bugs and ensure that they're blocking the release of
> Debian. AFAIK the criteria for when something can block the release of
> the stable version is pretty broad, though I might be mistaken.
>
> You can file bugs for both systemd, as well as the integration of other
> init systems. Though uncertain if others would be considered to block
> the release. If you encounter bugs in the support of others and they're
> not considered as "blocking the release", then maybe good to start a
> thread about that. I'm guessing you'll have a good chance to ensure that
> those bugs are looked at and maybe exceptions made if need be.
>
> However, if your argument is that "systemd against the users' will",
> or that you have no influence. Then 1) whatever, I'd argue the opposite
> and 2) you have, see above. Positive attitude helps.
I'm not sure why you suggest making bug reports. The last time I made
one, the package maintainer didn't show any interest in fixing anything,
and that's nowadays the usual experience with bug reports, with very few
exceptions.
In any case, I can't think of a bug report that would prevent the
inclusion of systemd into Debian or that could properly address the
problems systemd brings about. If I could, I would make that bug
report, even though I'd expect it not to get fixed anyway.
Bug reports just aren't the right means in this case.
Do you think I should make a bug report about the social contract or
about Debian itself? Is that even possible? Would that be the right
means?
The DDs cannot prove that they are guided by the needs of the users, and
I cannot prove that they aren't. Bug reports require facts that can be
verified and examined, and those aren't available.
--
Again we must be afraid of speaking of daemons for fear that daemons
might swallow us. Finally, this fear has become reasonable.
Reply to: