Re: Questions for all candidates re: interpersonal behavior
Clint Adams wrote:
Assume the demarcated hypothetical scenario to be true for the questions
I spend the next several hours sending Andrew Suffield chain letters
that say "if you don't fix tla by Thursday, your liver will transform
into mascarpone." I send these emails without making use of Debian
infrastructure, so as to not violate the DMUP.
At this point, hypothetical you should grow up, and the DAMs should
perhaps reconsider whether you can work with the rest of the project.
Andrew buries his face
in a pillow and cries until Saturday, at which point he realizes that
his liver is normal.
And hypothetical Andrew should be less crazy.
Fuming with rage, he then declares to his
favorite stuffed animal that, henceforth, he will ignore any bug I file.
Furthermore, he will ignore any bug that anyone else files on tla, and
will refuse to do any work on tla.
At some point after this, the QA/MIA team should notice and take an
He does not announce this publicly,
but his stuffed animal leaks this information to a select few other
developers, and the rumor makes its way to the DPL.
At this point you should see a psychiatrist and get some help about your
concerns that stuffed animals might leak your secrets.
When others offer
to NMU tla, he informs them that it is his package and they must keep
their grubby little paws away from it.
As long as you don't screw the package up or make gratuitious changes or
otherwise do stupid things that violate the NMU policy, it doesn't much
matter what the maintainer says, NMU's are okay.
Is any of this Debian's business? If so, which parts? What is the role
of the DPL in such a situation?
If hypothetical you and hypothetical Andrew can't work together, you
need to be separated; if hypothetical you or hypothetical someone else
is abusing a maintainer for their work on their package, that's
inappropriate, and should be recognised as such by everyone. In most
cases, I think people like hypothetical Andrew can deal with idiotic
flames such as hypothetical you hypothetically will have made, given
public support. Ideally, I think your whole scenario should stop at that
The real issue is finding a way of improving Debian that doesn't involve
suggesting that people are being incompetent, immoral or lazy, and
removing the incentive for hypothetical you to have started this whole