Hi there! On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 14:25:22 +0100, Gerfried Fuchs wrote: > This is longer as it should need to be, but I want to have some of the > background well explained and pointed out to be able to use it as > reference for others. Thank you, this is why I wanted to put a hint on the wiki. > * Luca Capello <luca@pca.it> [2011-02-09 11:59:14 CET]: >> >> BTW, if is OK if I add a link to this bug just after the FAQ entry? >> > >> > It's a wiki. ;) >> >> I know, just to be sure it was OK to put a reference there and not in >> the comment section, anyway, done: >> >> <http://wiki.debian.org/KallesDesign?action=diff&rev2=55&rev1=54> > > The comment you did put is a fair bit misleading. It was discussed WAY > before you filed this bugreport, and a concensus across those people > interested to work on the website has been reached. You might not like > the result of that discussion, but pointers and invitations to join the > effort where handed around on blogs (aggregated on planet), mailinglists > (not only debian-www but also debian-devel-announce (the must-read > list), and -devel, -project and a fair mount of others), dents (in the > debian group, syndicated also on twitter with the debian keyword) and at > debconf since the last two years (pixelgirl's talk at debconf8, marga's > talk at debconf9), and only coming when it was finally put into place > isn't very helpful. I fully agree on your words, but for the sake of completeness please notice that I did not object at all WRT to you closing the bug, simply stating that with my maintainer hat on I would have used wontfix. And in my submission I explicitly blamed me for not having act before (something which IMHO resembles your last sentence). Before submitting the bug I checked the BTS for this problem and found none, thus I went on. And the fact that there was no link on the wiki about the discussion that resulted in this decision is IMHO a bit misleading as well (BTW, thank you for correcting my words there). > Comments and suggestions are all fair and fine and gladly welcome, but > please accept and respect the decision and reasoning of those who have > worked on getting this enormous task finally done and into play. > Everything else comes across as pretty downputting, demotivating and > leaves the impression that you don't trust the people who actually did > invest their time and effort into into a task that noone else really was > interested in. Again, for the sake of completeness: I *accept/trust* everything you (and all the others involved in the new design) have done and will do, and I think I was quite clear in my first submission (look at the words in the parenthesis). I know how to help in Debian and I blame myself every time I do not do that for various reasons (still I live with it). >> I will prepare an example and come back with the code ;-) > > Don't be surprised if it might get ignored like we were ignored (or > rather, even received snide scathing comments) over the last years. We > will try to be a better receiving partner in this game though, so don't > let this hinder you to invest your time. No problem at all in being ignored, this was a wishlist bug anyway. Thx, bye, Gismo / Luca
Attachment:
pgpEpbiY4NPz_.pgp
Description: PGP signature