[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian services and responsibility



On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 12:33:23PM -0600, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-03-01 at 07:01, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > No, in fact I'd venture to say it's unacceptable.
> 
> And I will venture to say "step the fuck off".

Of course, I read this message only after sending my very long followup
where, wonder of wonders, I take note of Brainfood's long history of
contribution to Debian.

I'm sorry you took so much of that mail personally.

I didn't want to get bogged down in the specifics of this week's
incident because:
	1) I don't have full possession of the facts in the issue at
	question; and
	2) I think we should try to keep the DPL campaign focused
	on principles and not let it get bogged down in hot-button
	issues, like "should we drop support for non-free".

I Cc'ed the people I did because I *did* perceive a failure of process,
but it wasn't completely clear to me where the lines of communication
were broken.  Was it between Brainfood and DSA, between DSA and the
developers, or what?  If you're not following the traffic on the
debian-vote list closely, I can see how a bunch of hypotheticals might
get construed as a mixed bag of random accusations.

My context was a DPL campaign question.  Your context is as "incident",
which, as you said, might not even be a security breach at all, but is
certainly real-world and not highfalutin' platform stuff.

So again, I apologize for contributing to the confusion surrounding the
siutation with Debian machines hosted at Brainfood.

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |
Debian GNU/Linux                   |       kernel panic -- causal failure
branden@debian.org                 |       universe will now reboot
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgp98ASCh1MUd.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: