Bug#684128: SI units (was Re: failure to communicate)
On 05/04/13 14:06, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock writes ("SI units (was Re: failure to communicate)"):
>> It may actually be useful for the technical committee to review what is
>> on the wiki and make some general statement about Debian's position (if
>> they haven't done so in the past), and that can guide the way similar
>> bugs are classified for jessie and beyond.
>>
>> 1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/06/thrd2.html#00700
>>
>> 2. http://wiki.debian.org/ConsistentUnitPrefixes
>
> You should try to address this through the policy process. If and
> when we have competing policy proposals the TC might want to
> arbitrate.
Hi Ian (and thanks Ian),
Your issue is now on the radar and this is a clear way forward - even if
it has been missed for wheezy, I too would like to see this progress in
Debian, not just for the installer
Here is the link to the policy team:
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Policy
and this is the existing wiki on units, which doesn't appear to be
formal policy just yet:
http://wiki.debian.org/ConsistentUnitPrefixes
In the short term, the installer team really appear to have a lot of
competing demands, there are a range of bugs listed for D-I related
packages. In the long term, to keep Debian at the forefront, things
like installing onto bootable btrfs RAID1 works fine[1] but needs
changes to the installer to make it easy, and that appears to require
strategic changes to the installer architecture[2]. There is a clear
opportunity here for more people to be involved in the installer project
(both collaborating on the more urgent bugs and doing strategic work),
and approaching these issues as a whole would certainly give you a
chance of influencing its future direction.
Regards,
Daniel
1. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=686130
2. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=686097
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#684128: SI units (was Re: failure to communicate)
Daniel Pocock writes ("SI units (was Re: failure to communicate)"):
> It may actually be useful for the technical committee to review what is
> on the wiki and make some general statement about Debian's position (if
> they haven't done so in the past), and that can guide the way similar
> bugs are classified for jessie and beyond.
>
> 1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/06/thrd2.html#00700
>
> 2. http://wiki.debian.org/ConsistentUnitPrefixes
You should try to address this through the policy process. If and
when we have competing policy proposals the TC might want to
arbitrate.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#684128: SI units (was Re: failure to communicate)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/04/13 22:43, Christian PERRIER wrote: > Quoting ian_br...@fastmail.net (ian_br...@fastmail.net): > >> If Debian bug report #684128 proves anything, it is that you will never >> convince anyone with technical argument, facts advanced in support of > > > I perfectly understand you can be frustrated but, honestly, as of now, > we're focused on the wheezy release, again. Fixing debootstrap has > much more importance than Giga/Gibibytes. Once wheezy is released, I > see no reason for your proposed patch to be "rejected". Sadly, it appears that failure to communicate was from both sides Ian was told several times that changes may not be accepted for wheezy However, that communication was overshadowed by several comments suggesting nobody cares about the issue at all, rather than comments like that above explaining the relative importance of fixing other issues. This issue of units comes up again and again, there is a huge thread on debian-devel in 2007[1] - that hardly seems like something that nobody cares about. So while it may not make it into wheezy (I won't give my own opinion on this one, it is for the release team to decide), I don't think the reporter of this bug should be deterred by comments about it being a trivial wishlist or nonsense item. It may actually be useful for the technical committee to review what is on the wiki and make some general statement about Debian's position (if they haven't done so in the past), and that can guide the way similar bugs are classified for jessie and beyond. 1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/06/thrd2.html#00700 2. http://wiki.debian.org/ConsistentUnitPrefixes -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRXpjBAAoJEOm1uwJp1aqDmTsQAL7tmMmZqoZevDa4ZhfuxGrh R8340K+Fn0aZsYI66bxDHg/HDCJtCGfUpfTOYDnYfsSq+D+4X4ZFTJq6ezKvmbrO mBDCILtq0km753MyfYgnq37/sCbbTrZ/dLKtSWLNioAcqfnqItSC3PqLUYH2l4Tn MeXNCzMHKiG2J3hvWLM3knc3UMq/QGE2DUHzD32mk8zTCU4lAYOEsJOh8CQFKVri oYfGnFlC0Yy6+xf/E1An9Gx80qfRf07vW1odtEIMFmtrotocsj+z3xW1Q8LgwvTA EQ+yXHK7XWSFaruKSbkLyaM826syiRrDBzzTWN9Fi3gptYgJgEY0yGEQViQ6r5SL eosQlxALWLCCG9HOzXLf0HXlKDg4keRI+Ay1BJJkcNurcvF4v70ee4YxmlmD6lXK 2LiK/wb+FBjId0vpDP/kLRjhljt+kdNXe/4hqbc2d3aIY7Gnqjgz1o/I+x6+atrm YIKJM6pGTYrFL2vfsIn1mlrbXnqJEyyD04v7U2afb3n1Dxn9zh/6j7L2R0tv5eLl dCrnBkXjdLMyMaawyzb/uQyP2FvoFjk92XsehKDATLobQBnZvJ7B2ON6qtLWbn1Q jG5BvdMH++jU7m+yDlctcVo0dakgAd8UnQFvckjH1JhPwRIsmBYUbJu0Y8fqY2Gz mbpjVc641/AjIS4ytp10 =L0ZB -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
