Re: tb's questions for the candidates

[Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de>]

Hi, Anthony Towns wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 07, 2004 at 09:09:40AM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
>> Hi, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> > On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 14:32:45 +0000, Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com> said:
>> >> They should be treated like people who don't follow their duties,
>> > 	We have duties now? Can you point to me where it says that? I
>> >  looked all over the constitution, and failed.
>> The Constitution doesn't say that you _have_ to take on the maintenance of
>> packages X, Y and Z, but _if_ you do, you take on the duty of doing so
>> properly, in the manner specified by Policy et al.
> 
> Eh? No, it doesn't. It says quite the opposite: 
> 
>     1. Nothing in this constitution imposes an obligation on anyone to do
>        work for the Project. A person who does not want to do a task
>        which has been delegated or assigned to them does not need to do
>        it. 

So? That's what I said.

>            However, they must not actively work against these rules and
>        decisions properly made under them.
> 
If you actively take on some responsibility and then fail to actually
fulfill that responsibility it and/or fail to tell others that somebody
else needs to do the job, that _is_ to "actively work against these rules
and decisions" in my book.

YMMV, and all that. My position is, though, that this is the way it works
in many real-world communities also, and quite frankly I fail to see why
it shouldn't work that way in Debian.


I'll save the question whether my original mesage was _that_ difficult to
understand for some other time if you don't mind.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs