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

Re: Discussion period: GR: DFSG violations in Lenny

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 11:14:28PM +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 06:30:56PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> >> Can someone explain me why all these threads smell of gratuitous RM
> >> bashing?
> > 
> > I hope I didn't take part in that.  I'm very happy with the work done by
> > the RMs.  But that doesn't mean I want to give them the power to
> > overrule the SC without a GR.

Thanks Bas.  I completely share your view.  It's unfortunate that it's so
poorly understood :-(

> Hmm, it's not us that uploaded the packages that broke the SC without a
> GR, it's not us that accepted these packages into the archive, it's not
> us alone that tolerated these without searching and filing bugs for the
> issues till the release was near, it's not us alone that did wait to
> start fixing the bugs till the release was near. It's only us that
> wanted it to be clear that if the bugs won't be fixed in time, we would
> not wait for the fixes before releasing... that's all the ignore tags tells.

It's not your fault!  Nobody (well, at least not me) is pretending that
you're the source of this problem.  However, that doesn't mean that the
solution you want to apply is legitimate.

Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."

Reply to: