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

Re: Questions for the candidates

On Tue, Mar 02, 2004 at 11:43:29AM +0100, Falk Hueffner wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> writes:
> > Do you believe that developers should be (or are) equally willing to have
> > a dialogue with people who provide criticism consisting of suggestions
> > of alternatives, discussion of tradeoffs that can and should be made
> > and helpful bits of code, or people who accompany their complaints with
> > comments like "This FUCKING SUCKS! The maintainer must be incompetent or
> > on crack" and requests for dismissal or replacement rather than useful
> > assistance?
> If you want to make a point, that's fine, but please don't abuse
> debian-vote and "Questions for the candidates" for this, that just
> wastes everybody's time. These are no reasonable questions.

That's only one question quoted there. Are you saying you think all of the
others are unreasonable too, or just that one? I think it's reasonable,
and I'd certainly like to know the project's position on it. I'd
certainly thought I'd seen people expecting being equally informative
and communicative with people no matter how much they'd irritated you.

I can't say that sort of response particularly encourages me to be
communicative, though. I don't particularly want to waste everybody's
time just because I think something's important.


Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

             Linux.conf.au 2004 -- Because we could.
           http://conf.linux.org.au/ -- Jan 12-17, 2004

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: