Re: Question for candidate Robinson
Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> He, i can inform you that in our "small team" as Andreas would say, for which
> i came to post 300+ mails to -legal in order to not get our 50+ packages moved
> to non-free without warning over a couple of dissident or other bogus tests,
> there is a big concensus that -legal is not thrustable and no real help in
> DFSG freeness.
Why do you think that you would get no warning? It's not like
debian-legal play with the archive settings themselves and
there are enough people who repost the smallest contentious
debian-legal discussion all over the network when they can.
I know it's easier to close down small debates early, but your
tactics in the QPL discussions were disgusting and only helped
it to mushroom confusingly, in my opinion. This is partly a
problem with debian-legal documentation, but some of the stuff
you do is listed as "don't do this" in the list code of conduct.
> My own experience shows that this is something shared by a not
> so small part of the DDs, and i told you so on -legal back then too.
Sorry, I've lost the reference and I can't find it in your large
volume of mails.
[...]
> Many DDs only want to package their package in peace, and not get dragged info
> a many-thousand -legal flamewar over imagined DFSG non-compliance and bogus
> tests.
Who "dragged" you into it? I thought you brought some fuel.
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks.
Reply to: