Re: Proposed General Resolution : IRC as a Debian communication channel
On Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 11:25:56PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Le Sun, Nov 04, 2001 at 08:23:26PM +0000, Andrew Suffield écrivait:
> > #debian could also be considered a representative part of Debian in
> > the eyes of the casual visitor, but it is also in no way a Debian
> > resource. Take your personal gripes up with the channel founder, which
> > is currently Wichert Akkerman.
> It's absolutely fantastic. Each person has its own opinion about who has
> the right to decide about this issue. Branden doesn't agree with you for
> example (ie he doesn't think that it's up to Wichert to decide) ...
Wichert is the channel founder for #debian-devel.
Branden is a channel operator (chanop) for #debian-devel. He was given
chanop by Wichert.
Andrew is an irc operator (ircop) for Open Projects Network, as am I.
Andrew is correct when he says that channel issues are to be brought up
with the channel founder. OPN policy has been, thus far, to leave the
resolution of channel problems up to the channel founder, and his
delegates, the channel operators. Only in *extreme cases* do irc
operators interfere with channel operations.
So, Branden's opinion doesn't seem relevant here. As far as OPN is
concerned, channels are the domain of channel founders. If Debian wishes
to operate it's own servers so that it can have channel policies
different than those of OPN's, so be it.
> I really wonder why we have a constitution and a vote system if
> it's not meant to be used... why do people fear using our (more or less)
> democratic « tools » ?
The point here is not whether people are afraid of using these
democratic tools, but whether these tools are applicable. They are not
as far as OPN is concerned (at least, thus far ).
> Wichert, as the channel founder, which policy should be applied on
> #debian-devel ?
> If you don't think that it's up to you to decide, what is the correct
> way to decide the policy for the channel ?
If Wichert wants to hand channel founder to the current DPL, he may do
so. If the current DPL doesn't hand over the channel founder to the next
DPL, he may do that, too. Again, as far as OPN is concerned, channels
are the domain of the channel founders.
> > > nothing came out. Now I've launched a general resolution so that we can
> > > take a final decision and stop loosing time with such stupid issues.
> > And if it passes, exactly nothing will change. Debian has no power to
> > enforce this policy.
> I hope the operators (who are Debian developers) will accept Debian's
> decision. Otherwise I really don't see why we have a constitution ...
Channel operators serve at the desire of the channel founder. Generally
speaking, IRC operators do not interfere with channel operations. The
Debian constitution does not apply to OPN. If Debian wants its
constitution to apply to irc.debian.org, then Debian should establish
its own servers under irc.debian.org and not link to
Please note: I am *not* advocating that Debian set up its own IRC
network. I'm trying to clarify the difference between Debian and OPN.
 lilo, OPN founder, has established these policies. He could, of
course, change his mind. I doubt that he will.
[dpkg] We are the apt. Resistance is futile. You will be packaged.