Re: Question for candidate Towns
Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
Adeodato Simó <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
* Anthony Towns [Sat, 12 Mar 2005 10:52:49 +1000]:
Hrm. I thought for sure I'd made that clear in that thread, but now I
can't seem to find any evidence of it.
"I'm happy to do the same thing for any other maintainer who is being
attacked by someone who's trying to use the BTS reopen command to force
a maintainer to do things against their better judgement."
That's from the link above.
L33t, I'm blind.
Yes, but this doesn't *quite* answer my question.
The question is whether the bts people will make their own decision
about anything, or just do whatever the maintainer says.
Of course they'll look over whatever bug you claim is being abused. I
don't understand why you'd even imagine it'd be otherwise.
See, the point is that in Anthony Towns' case, he didn't need to worry
about any re-investigation of the question.
Of course I didn't: I could already see it was the case, and I gave
Enrico fair warning after which he continued reopening the bug. If
you're in the same circumstances, you don't need to worry about getting
checked over either.
Nobody would decide that
he's being unreasonable, nobody would second-guess his technical
judgement, nobody would do anything,
My technical judgement got a thorough going over on -devel, which is
archived permanently and available from the above urls, and should my
judgement have been found seriously wanting any of the other debbugs
admins would have corrected it.
That's all as it should be.
Also, the above's getting pretty off-topic -- it's no longer about the
DPL stuff, and it's not even about anything happening currently, and
it's even getting kinda close to just being a random personal attack
about events from a year ago -- focussing as it does on whether I,
personally, get different standards to everyone else in the project and
am thus by implication some sort of immoral tyrant -- rather than
anything particularly technical (since after all you've explicitly
agreed the right outcome was reached).
It'd be easy to bring it back on topic -- either by moving it to -devel
or -debbugs and making it be about the bugs.d.o policy and improving
that; or by discussing it in the context of Debian mailing list policy.
But you're not doing that, and I suspect the thought didn't even cross
your mind that it'd be a good idea -- heck, it only barely crossed my
mind, and I'm the one on the whole "clean up the lists" kick here. I
think that's the main problem with Debian lists -- we're too much in the
habit of just discussing things interminably and forgetting what the
whole point was in the first place. I think we need something to help
get us (back?) in the habit of focussed, technical discussions by
default rather than aimless political dialogues.