Re: GR proposed re: choice of init systems
On 21/10/14 00:49, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 20/10/14 04:03, Martin Read wrote:
>>> On 19/10/14 17:45, Rusi Mody wrote:
>>>> As for 'wounded ego': Do you have a wounded ego if a dead branch
>>>> falls and smashes the windshield of your car? Or a Tsunami knocks
>>>> off your seafront house?
>>>>
>>>> If you are taking offense, who are you offended by? Debian is not a
>>>> person (as far as I know!)
>>> Debian is a project created by a group of people.
>>>
>>> It is not a force of nature.
>>>
>>>
>> And "user/tester" rights?
>> Problematic.... to a degree all consumers are users and can/do provide
>> feedback. I'm not unsympathetic, just unsure of where the
>> "responsibility" lies, particularly with FOSS - and wary of unrealistic
>> expectations.
>> Since analogies are being deployed:- If I find a piece of machinery
>> unsatisfactory I will let the manufacturer know - but getting a say in
>> the direction of the company, even when overlooking the problems of
>> satisfying a diversity of opinion, is not possible without at least the
>> purchase of a share or a position in the company. I could organise a
>> protest in the car park - but if my demands are unreasonable I may
>> succeed in changing the company direction at the cost of driving the
>> business - out of business.
>>
>> Just some thoughts on the difficulties that would have to be dealt with
>> to achieve a successful outcome - for all involved.
>>
>>
>
> Well, it's worth noting that in many areas of endeavor, users, or user
> communities, write specifications/standards that all players have to
> meet. So, for example, when one buys an ethernet card - vendors really
> do not really have a choice as to whether or not to implement the
> standards.
True - though I don't see the relevance to "Debian users". The
"standards" that Debian uses - and there are many - couldn't be defined
as "written" by Debian "users".
>
> With Linux distros, including the kernel and implementing the LSB are
> pretty much things everyone has to meet (with a few notable exceptions
> like GNU/kFreeBSD - though arguably that's not Linux).
Agreed Miles, and I don't mean to overlook the huge advantage that the
(F)OSS model has over closed-source in it's testing userbase.
That still doesn't translate into entitlement. "Tail wagging dog"?.
Analogies have their limitations, but...
In the 80s a Sydney Mental Hospital experimented with letting the
patients vote on the medication they were given. It's not a system still
in use - despite successful outcomes in a small percentage of patients.
A problem with trying to please everyone due to the nature of diversity
(and that xy thing).
Like democracy the Debian system of letting developers decide what they
develop is not a perfect model, but it's the least worst one we've got -
and it's the "developers model". We as users, are free to suggest, but
might be foolish to force. Words that springs to mind are "guidance",
"feedback", and "symbiotic", softer terms than "obligation" and
"entitlement" or "debt".
Though the military may disagree - enforced "freedom" is oxymoronic. At
which I'll leave my part in this discussion.
>
> Miles Fidelman
>
Kind regards
Reply to: