Don Armstrong wrote: > Exactly how are Debian Developers preventing others from contributing?
For one by closing bugs without fixing them. As users we are always admonished to file bugs. But whether those bugs will be acknowledge and handled appropriately depends upon the project. My experience is that if it is systemd that the bug will not be handled nicely. > Almost everything we do is publicly available. Nothing is stopping > anyone from contributing to Debian, proposing patches, or even forking > Debian entirely if you want. And quite frankly that is pretty much what we are forced into doing. (Using dpkg-divert locally is effectively a micro-fork.) > In all of these separate threads, you have been doing little but > maligning people who are volunteering for Debian. It's not a nice thing > to do, it's not pleasant to read, and in doing so, you're actively > draining existing contributor's desire to continue working on Debian. > > Please stop. So for example look at a bug I filed: https://bugs.debian.org/735002 /usr/lib/sysctl.d/50-default.conf: Disables SysRq key The systemd maintainers decided that Debian systems should not have an effective SysRq key. I objected and filed a bug. It was quickly merged with Bug#725422 which had been closed without fixing. https://bugs.debian.org/725422 Reading through Bug#725422 showed me that there was no hope of getting the problem fixed. There was a refusal to even acknowledge it as a problem at all. I despaired. Responses like that suck the life out of me as a user and bug reporter. I decided to use dpkg-divert to divert the file (a micro-fork) to fix the problem locally. Eventually Ben Hutchings got involved, reopened the bug, and objected to the kernel maintainers choices being overridden. And therefore it was eventually fixed. But if he had not gotten involved I am sure it would not have been fixed since it had not been in spite of multiple reports. Bob
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
