On Thu, Sep 10 2009, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 11:00:53AM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>>If someone really want to maintain such package, we should not >>prohibit it, but we should make it clear that it is strongly >>recommended to not maintain such package, and that the advantage of >>the software should be weighted against the problems it causes for the >>Debian community. Perhaps we should also suggest that one start >>working on alternatives for packages with hostile upstream, instead of >>spending time on social interactions with upstream. :) > > Well, what happens if somebody wants to maintain software where there > is a strong set of opinion that we don't want it? In this case, I'd > like to delegate the power to the ftpmasters to say so and reject from > NEW etc. If we have a clear consensus that that would be OK then fine; > otherwise I'd like to run this through the GR process to make sure the > project as a whole agrees. > It could be controversial, which is why I'm bringing this up now > rather than via an argument after-the-fact... I would like to see more on how the ftpmasters (a small group of overworked people already tasked with too much) will be able to determine that there is a strong set of opinions that we do not want it (as opposed to a small vocal minority that vehemently opposes something -- we have had people violently opposed to things like HAL and udev)? Before we chose to override a DD's decision about their own package, there ought to be an objective criteria for that override, in my opinion. manoj -- Q: What's yellow, and equivalent to the Axiom of Choice? A: Zorn's Lemon. Manoj Srivastava <sriva...@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org