On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 12:38:16PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Using Debian packages is a *means*, not an *end*. Sometimes in these > discussions I think people lose sight of the fact that, at the end of the > day, the goal is not to construct an elegantly consistent system composed > of theoretically pure components. That's a *preference*, but there's > something that system is supposed to be *doing*, and we will do what we > need to do in order to make the system functional.
And in particular, where a problem cannot be solved in pure Debian, I don't want Debian to interfere with the bit of the solution that lives outside of its domain. That may include not attempting to package/patch/alter/adjust upstream systems like Go that have a different philosophical approach. The worst case scenario IMHO is some people invest a lot of time to make the Debianized-Go stuff quite divergent from upstream, people's expectations of how things behave in Go-land are broken when they access Go-via-Debian, the job is never quite complete and so we get extra bugs, and a new upstream community relationship is marred. This is a much worse outcome than not attempting to package Go at all, IMHO. I guess I'd quite like the boundaries of responsibility to be very clear, when I'm forced to have such boundaries. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130205173047.GC21754@debian