On 11/09/2014 at 05:26 AM, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 04:27:21AM +0100, Michael Meskes wrote: > >> I'd assume he was referring to: >> >>> If my GR passes we will only have to have this conversation if >>> those who are outvoted do not respect the project's collective >>> decision. >> >>> If my GR fails I expect a series of bitter rearguard battles >>> over individual systemd dependencies. >> >> This to me reads like the threat Holger mentioned. And for the >> record, I was very surprised to this given the history of the >> decision. > > FWIW, I did not read this as a threat, or at least, I did not read it > as suggesting that Ian himself would participate in this bitter > rearguard action. I read this as meaning Ian suspected that unless > his GR was carried, various anti-systemd people would not be > mollified and their disagreement would percolate down to individual > packages and bugs, rather than being discussed (and potentially > addressed) at a project-wide level. As such, and I'm assuming good > faith on Ian's part here, I think Ian was trying to describe what he > thought was the likely outcome, and not specifically threaten to > behave in a particular way. Thank you. I've been trying to think of a way to clearly express that for some time now, ever since people first started to indicate that they thought this comment was a threat. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature