Re: Standardization, large scale changes, innovations
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 18:54, Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 09:57:35AM +0200, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
>> BTW, does Manoj own those package?
Another word for something that's owned by someone is "proprietary",
so another way of saying the above in English is "Manoj's packages are
I realise that's "just" playing with terminology, and isn't the same
as saying "Manoj's packages are not DFSG-free" -- but saying "Manoj
owns the corner of the archive that allows uploads of packages named
make, fvwm, angband, etc" has problems, even if nowhere near as many
as would saying "Manoj owns the right to modify or redistribute this
sequence of bytes wherever they may occur".
Personally, I'd draw the line more at considering Manoj as someone who
tends to his packages, and thus is someone worth talking to about
them, but who doesn't have any authority over them beyond how well he
can persuade other developers that his preferred course of action is
the right one.
Of course, in my world, the same would be true of other people trying
to convince Manoj that the best way to maintain his packages is with
debhelper or similar. Sometimes I think the art of persuasion (or
perhaps the art of be persuadable) is sadly underutilised.
(I think it'd be entertaining to have some debates where sides get
randomly assigned, so you're obliged to defend ideas you personally
think are wrong, and attack ones you personally think are right.
Whether it would do any good, or if anyone would be willing to
volunteer, on the other hand...)
Anthony Towns <firstname.lastname@example.org>