Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Friday 25 March 2005 02:51 pm, Adam McKenna wrote: No matter how you feel about the term editorial changes, it seems to me that if these changes were really so bad, and the majority of the project is now against them, they should be easy enough to roll back. All we need is another GR. Stop bitching and propose one. http://www.debian.org/vote/2004/vote_004 Of course, the roll back the changes was defeated by a 2:1 ratio in that vote by the winning option... Daniel -- /--- Daniel Burrows [EMAIL PROTECTED] --\ | The only thing that history teaches us | | is that we do not learn from history.| \--- Be like the kid in the movie! Play chess! -- http://www.uschess.org --/ pgpRAf6DlwPg7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 12:48:14PM -0600, Adam Majer wrote: Andreas Barth wrote: Actually, I believe the Debian project as whole _wants_ to getting software released. That was at least the decision in all GRs where people didn't hide the intents (editorial changes). Indeed. These types of changes are akin to changing a country's constitution and calling these editorial changes bill. But then again we can always change it back and call the change editorial changes as well. No matter how you feel about the term editorial changes, it seems to me that if these changes were really so bad, and the majority of the project is now against them, they should be easy enough to roll back. All we need is another GR. Stop bitching and propose one. --Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mar 25, Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No matter how you feel about the term editorial changes, it seems to me that if these changes were really so bad, and the majority of the project is now against them, they should be easy enough to roll back. Adam, meet Apathy. Apathy, meet Adam. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
* Russell Coker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050324 00:35]: On Thursday 24 March 2005 03:40, Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the free software fanatics succeed in kicking non-free from being supported by Debian assets, such that the FSF documentation were no longer available, I'd probably end up agreeing with you and probably would do what you are considering to do after sarge ships. If it would help, I'd ask you to reconsider. If all the reasonable moderates leave, then all that will be left will be the extremists. Of course an option is always to fork the project. Maybe it's time to have a Debian project that focusses on getting software released as opposed to the Debian that wants to be fanatic. Actually, I believe the Debian project as whole _wants_ to getting software released. That was at least the decision in all GRs where people didn't hide the intents (editorial changes). Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
* Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 22:39]: I'm also not satisfied with the non-productiveness of the removal of useful documentation. I'm also ashamed that some hardware doesn't work out of the box on Debian because we decided that firmware are software and thus should meet DFSG. However I don't plan to leave Debian because it's just not the right thing to do. I joined Debian because its goal was to satisfy its users... and sadly it turns that some developers forget about that when prefering freeness over the service to our users. I'm sad that you see it this way. But in my eyes freeness is one of our most beneficial services to our users. For those aspects of computer life we and our users are locked into software we (including developers and users) are not allowed to fix, not allowed to see what they do and/or maybe not even allowed to give to others, we (Debian) supply the non-free section in addition to our distribution. I think this is an important service, though one the one hand I'm happy it has lost much of its importance for applications as there are nowadays much more free alternatives, and on the other hand non-free licenses shift a bit into the direction where we are not even allowed to ship them in non-free. But the goal we should aim is still Debian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer. We are about free software. And free software includes the promise for freedom. I'm sick of bloody buggy non-free drivers I'm not allowed to look close enough to have a chance to fix them. I'm sick of software telling me I have to download it for each single computer again instead of once and distributing it. I'm sick of software I'm not able to redistribute to others as I could have to pay for some legal fees, I'm sick of documentation I'm not allowed to merge with the documentation within the code, not allowed to bring in forms I like, or with preposterous demands like not changing the title or adding a 20k text into every manpage or digest sheet. And I really think we have no right to foist such things on our users. Put non-free stuff in non-free, that's what it is for. If we are unable to offer free programs, drivers and documentation, we have no right to hide the next best thing in main. If we are unable to provide what we promised (free stuff) we should at least mark the non-free stuff as non-free stuff, so that our users can make their decision. We need to have a big political shift on that side, or we'll loose more valuable contributors in favor of other distributions... you may not care but I want Debian to stay the central distribution and I don't want that other distributions do a better service to users than us. Has there ever been a time when people did not tell Debian will die instantly (or perhaps only next month) if we do not do what some people say our users consider the better service. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 10:59:37AM +0100, Bernhard R. Link wrote: * Raphael Hertzog [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 22:39]: I'm also not satisfied with the non-productiveness of the removal of useful documentation. I'm also ashamed that some hardware doesn't work out of the box on Debian because we decided that firmware are software and thus should meet DFSG. [...] I'm sad that you see it this way. But in my eyes freeness is one of our most beneficial services to our users. Please don't rehash old arguments. Nobody has argued that we should put non-free packages into main, but we don't agree on what is free and what isn't for all types of packages. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please don't rehash old arguments. Nobody has argued that we should put non-free packages into main, but we don't agree on what is free and what isn't for all types of packages. Actually, nobody from the more lenient side has given a description of what they think the right bounds for freeness are for documentation, and why those bounds should be different than for programs. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
Andreas Barth wrote: Actually, I believe the Debian project as whole _wants_ to getting software released. That was at least the decision in all GRs where people didn't hide the intents (editorial changes). Indeed. These types of changes are akin to changing a country's constitution and calling these editorial changes bill. But then again we can always change it back and call the change editorial changes as well. - Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 10:28:36AM -0800, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please don't rehash old arguments. Nobody has argued that we should put non-free packages into main, but we don't agree on what is free and what isn't for all types of packages. Actually, nobody from the more lenient side has given a description of what they think the right bounds for freeness are for documentation, and why those bounds should be different than for programs. That may be true for documentation but certainly not for firmware, which has been discussed to death. (Not with a satisfactory outcome, imho.) Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mar 24, Hamish Moffatt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That may be true for documentation but certainly not for firmware, which has been discussed to death. (Not with a satisfactory outcome, imho.) And one of the reasons for which licensing for documentation has not been discussed is that most people were not aware of the scope of the editorial changes, so there was no reason to discuss anything. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:24:41PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: The Vancouver meeting summary upset me, not because of the proposals to drop architectures, but because it contained a reminder of the Social Contract changes. The project is moving to what I believe to be a ridiculously extremist position. I can't support the new Social Contract, and wouldn't sign up for it if I were going through NM right now. So the only honourable thing for me to do is resign at the point when it come into effect. It saddens me greatly that we've come to this situation. I've been proud to be a Debian Developer for the past 6 years. I'd like to say, as others have when resigning, that I will continue to run Debian on my machines, but I can't. Moving documentation to non-free makes Debian a less suitable distribution for me. I shall have to look around and see what other distributions suit my needs. The way that I deal with this from a personal point of view is to remind myself that non-free is supported by Debian-the-organization, even if it is not formally part of the Debian distribution. Semantic games, but unfortunately Debian seems to be more focused on flame wars about semantics than actually shipping code and documentation that meets the needs of its users. If the free software fanatics succeed in kicking non-free from being supported by Debian assets, such that the FSF documentation were no longer available, I'd probably end up agreeing with you and probably would do what you are considering to do after sarge ships. If it would help, I'd ask you to reconsider. If all the reasonable moderates leave, then all that will be left will be the extremists. Regards, - Ted -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Thursday 24 March 2005 03:40, Theodore Ts'o [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the free software fanatics succeed in kicking non-free from being supported by Debian assets, such that the FSF documentation were no longer available, I'd probably end up agreeing with you and probably would do what you are considering to do after sarge ships. If it would help, I'd ask you to reconsider. If all the reasonable moderates leave, then all that will be left will be the extremists. Of course an option is always to fork the project. Maybe it's time to have a Debian project that focusses on getting software released as opposed to the Debian that wants to be fanatic. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
Sven Luther wrote: Still i believe i have made some constructive proposals, and even if my first posts may have been a bit too aggressive, for which i apologize, or too many, i think it is also a prove of the passion which lies on this issue. Something which has the potential to affect many of what we believe debian is, and which is handled by utter contempt, at least in the initial posting. I give my support to Sven. And I think there is many more people in this list who should apologize, too. And I believe that the Vancouver proposal, if implemented as intended up to now, will not only affect what Debian really *is*, but in some ways will *destroy* what Debian is. Massa -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 09:06:19AM -0300, Humberto Massa wrote: And I believe that the Vancouver proposal, if implemented as intended up to now, will not only affect what Debian really *is*, but in some ways will *destroy* what Debian is. Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the crackpots who insist that everything is software. -- Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception. -- Mark Twain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
* Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 16:51]: Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the crackpots who insist that everything is software. You mean some people failed to destroy Debian though loudly and very often repeating the claim that some types of software do not count as software? Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
Le mardi 22 mars 2005 à 17:46 +0100, Bernhard R. Link a écrit : * Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 16:51]: Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the crackpots who insist that everything is software. You mean some people failed to destroy Debian though loudly and very often repeating the claim that some types of software do not count as software? Why should people always be so counterproductive ? I'm also not satisfied with the non-productiveness of the removal of useful documentation. I'm also ashamed that some hardware doesn't work out of the box on Debian because we decided that firmware are software and thus should meet DFSG. However I don't plan to leave Debian because it's just not the right thing to do. I joined Debian because its goal was to satisfy its users... and sadly it turns that some developers forget about that when prefering freeness over the service to our users. We need to have a big political shift on that side, or we'll loose more valuable contributors in favor of other distributions... you may not care but I want Debian to stay the central distribution and I don't want that other distributions do a better service to users than us. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog -+- http://www.ouaza.com Formation Linux et logiciel libre : http://www.logidee.com Earn money with free software: http://www.geniustrader.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 07:36:50PM +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote: Le mardi 22 mars 2005 à 17:46 +0100, Bernhard R. Link a écrit : * Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] [050322 16:51]: Debian has already decided to destroy what it is by giving in to the crackpots who insist that everything is software. You mean some people failed to destroy Debian though loudly and very often repeating the claim that some types of software do not count as software? Why should people always be so counterproductive ? I'm also not satisfied with the non-productiveness of the removal of useful documentation. I'm also ashamed that some hardware doesn't work out of the box on Debian because we decided that firmware are software and thus should meet DFSG. Notice that the plan is to have non-free drivers in non-free, as both .debs and .udebs, and thus users can just download them from there, and feed them to d-i through floppies or netbooting, and i guess some may even include them on custom cds with added non-free. Notice also, that technically such non-free modules can only be made once upstream has clarified the copyright on those files and clearly excluded the binary firmware blobs from the GPL coverage. Once that is done, it only constitutes mere aggregation and is thus distributable in non-free. This is why we voted to keep non-free back then, so let's make use of it for non-free stuff. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
[ Please followup to the right list depending on the contents of your reply. Be aware I'm not subscribed to -kernel, so Cc me if needed ] On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:14:37AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: [huge rant about NEW and hurting kernel stuff etc etc] Three remarks: Rejecting those would lead in a pissed kernel maintainer team i would say. Please be aware that NEW processing is human work. There's quite a big backlog (currently still over 300 while I feel a lot got done already), and I at least try to err on the side of caution. This means, and yes, it already happenen, that it will occasionally happen we will reject an upload by mistake. If this happens to you, just reply to the mail (as its footer says, if you don't understand the reject, reply) and it will looked into. Of course, if we decide it was a mistake and your package should be accepted, we'll process it out-of-order (The mistake I rectified yesterday was in NEW for 70 seconds, surely a record). Taking it as offence and acting accordingly could have negative effects on swift reprocessing. I think i would have warranted at least a reply on this case, don't you think ? Maybe, if one would reply to all mails you send out, one wouldn't have time for ANY other Debian work. For example, you contributed 75 mails[1] within 24 hours to the Vancouver thread, consisting (excluding quoted text) of about 7522 words in 43kB of hand-written text[2]. I'm sorry, but you think it's weird people can't resist accidentally hitting the 'd' key when seeing an incoming mail from you? Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package might be warranted and help Sarge. If there is such a case, it would help if someone other than yourself from the kernel team contact the right email address[3] about it, I had a hard time distilling from your mails if and which packages would genuinly benefit sarge if they were processed swiftly, of course together with a short and factual explanation. You can also try to make a release-team-person ask, but they are also busy people, so why bother them? Thanks, --Jeroen [1] http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen/sven-vancouver-24h.mbox [2] wget -qO- http://lists.debian.org/~jeroen/sven-vancouver-24h.body \ grep -v '^' | wc [3] http://www.debian.org/intro/organization -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar [EMAIL PROTECTED] (also for Jabber MSN; ICQ: 33944357) http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:11:06PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: [ Please followup to the right list depending on the contents of your reply. Be aware I'm not subscribed to -kernel, so Cc me if needed ] On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:14:37AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: [huge rant about NEW and hurting kernel stuff etc etc] Three remarks: Rejecting those would lead in a pissed kernel maintainer team i would say. Please be aware that NEW processing is human work. There's quite a big which is my main grip with the subpart of it which could be automated. For example, kernel-source-2.6.11 was just uploaded today, which means a plethora of uploads all needing NEW processing. Can you give me any reason why this really needs NEW processing, and why you don't thrust the kernel-team on this ? backlog (currently still over 300 while I feel a lot got done already), and I at least try to err on the side of caution. This means, and yes, it already happenen, that it will occasionally happen we will reject an the problem is not the reject, is the no news in weeks and no communication channel open. But again, i think and hope that this will become better now. upload by mistake. If this happens to you, just reply to the mail (as its footer says, if you don't understand the reject, reply) and it will looked into. Of course, if we decide it was a mistake and your package should be accepted, we'll process it out-of-order (The mistake I rectified yesterday was in NEW for 70 seconds, surely a record). Taking it as offence and acting accordingly could have negative effects on swift reprocessing. There was no real swift processing in the past. Also, i believe that if packages are being considered and have some problems, it would be best to include the maintainer having made the upload into this process as early as possible. I think i would have warranted at least a reply on this case, don't you think ? Maybe, if one would reply to all mails you send out, one wouldn't have time for ANY other Debian work. For example, you contributed 75 mails[1] within 24 hours to the Vancouver thread, consisting (excluding quoted text) of about 7522 words in 43kB of hand-written text[2]. I'm sorry, but you think it's weird people can't resist accidentally hitting the 'd' key when seeing an incoming mail from you? Well, sending email to a discussion forum like debian-devel, and sending email to a debian-role like ftp-master is not comparable, and i think it shows a profund lack of responsability on your part even suggesting this. How would you feel about a developer ignoring bug report from a certain person just because he has posted a big amount of emails to debian-devel ? And a falling-in-his-duties DD has at least the QA team and the MIA check to watch over him, while the ftp-masters can have any uncontrolled whim and we have no choice but to abide by them. Furthermore i see a serious failing in your logic, in the fact that the emails you quote are posterior to the failure of reply from the ftp-master's office, and can thus not be used to excuse it. Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package might be warranted and help Sarge. If there is such a case, it would help if someone other than yourself from the kernel team contact the right email address[3] about it, I had a hard time distilling from your Why not me ? I would very much like a reason for that, am i in some way blacklisted ? and if so for what reason ? And is this reason an acceptable one, i seriously doubt so. I am part of the kernel team, and i did work on my other packages which are more or less in good state, as well as actively participated in the debian-installer work. Why should you not threat a question on my part as from any other developer ? And if you do not, would it not be understandable that i feel irritated by this inacceptable behavior that has a blocking effect on my own participation to debian. mails if and which packages would genuinly benefit sarge if they were processed swiftly, of course together with a short and factual explanation. You can also try to make a release-team-person ask, but they are also busy people, so why bother them? Whatever. I believe that your response to email send to ftp-master's role in debian should not be influenced by any personal negative opinion you may have on me, even if it may be warranted. We all work together to make the debian release as great and swift as possible, and this kind of blacklisting of some of our developers is inacceptable, and a severe failure in the ftp-master's role responsability against the project. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:10:34PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:20:29PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package might be warranted and help Sarge. If there is such a case, it would help if someone other than yourself from the kernel team contact the right email address[3] about it, I had a hard time distilling from your Why not me ? I would very much like a reason for that, am i in some way Because you are impossible to deal with. I think this mail from you shows all the characteristics which make you such a pain in the fucking arse. See a psychologist. Really. Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for which i am searching a co-maintainer since 6 month, and take over the powerpc kernels as well as do my job in the debian kernel team, as well as the support of powerpc issues in d-i and the maintainance of a big part of the ocaml subset. Until you are ready to do that, it is not acceptable to imply that the ftp-masters can be made to fail their job and threat developers like dirt just because they have no counter power to them, and i should support every abuse of them. Not friendly anymore and expecting excuses from you Matthew and the whole ftp-master team for their discrimination of me. Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
Dear, all, [...] I'm quite unhappy that this thread has turned so bad. Please, all of us who are part of this thread, can we please try to get the heat out. I think we all are happy that ftp-masters and -assistents are currently working on reducing the NEW queue to a reasonable size. This will have some good effect not only on the kernel, but also on every other package in Debian. I also think that we should be thankful for their hard work. Also, I think we all know that keeping the kernel in sync is currently a not too easy job. So, for very similar reasons, we all should be happy with the steady progress we're having on the kernel. If we consider woody's situation, we have by far too many kernel packages - a problem that was solved by the kernel team for sarge. So, we all are doing a hard job, and life is sometimes just stressing. It would be really great if we can manage to keep the heat out, that would help us all to do a better (and more enjoyable) job. Thanks for your attention, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
* Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050321 17:05]: I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian shortly after sarge releases. Why do you intend to leave Debian? Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:45:10PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote: On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for which i am searching a co-maintainer since 6 month, and take over the powerpc kernels as well as do my job in the debian kernel team, as well as the support of powerpc issues in d-i and the maintainance of a big part of the ocaml subset. I think Debian would be better finding someone else to do those tasks, yes. I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian shortly after sarge releases. I can't believe Debian is so short on skills that it needs you. DON'T EVER ADDRESS ME IN THE FUTUR AND GET YOURSELF LOST. Anyway, i am out of this and you and Jeroen have managed to do it, and all those self-rigtheous ftp-master and other release team, who think someone complaining just whines, and don't care that they do exactly the same, or those who like to complain about being the recipient of flamewars, and then doing the exact same thing to others. Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:11:06PM +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: Maybe, if one would reply to all mails you send out, one wouldn't have time for ANY other Debian work. For example, you contributed 75 mails[1] within 24 hours to the Vancouver thread, consisting (excluding quoted text) of about 7522 words in 43kB of hand-written text[2]. I'm sorry, but you think it's weird people can't resist accidentally hitting the 'd' key when seeing an incoming mail from you? And what about the email i sent to remove some erroneously ACCEPTED and then REJECTED kernel package from the REJECT queue ? I had to mail twice about this, and nothing ever happened for almost a month of so, all the while you where spamming all of debian-kernel daily with said bogus reject message ? Hurt, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 03:20:29PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: Anyway, regarding kernels: I can imagine sometimes, especially with the backlog we have currently, a swift processing of some kernel package might be warranted and help Sarge. If there is such a case, it would help if someone other than yourself from the kernel team contact the right email address[3] about it, I had a hard time distilling from your Why not me ? I would very much like a reason for that, am i in some way Because you are impossible to deal with. I think this mail from you shows all the characteristics which make you such a pain in the fucking arse. See a psychologist. Really. -- Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception. -- Mark Twain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: Thanks. Maybe i should resign from my debian duties then since i am not wanted. Do you volunteer to take over my packages ? Please handle parted for which i am searching a co-maintainer since 6 month, and take over the powerpc kernels as well as do my job in the debian kernel team, as well as the support of powerpc issues in d-i and the maintainance of a big part of the ocaml subset. I think Debian would be better finding someone else to do those tasks, yes. I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian shortly after sarge releases. I can't believe Debian is so short on skills that it needs you. Not friendly anymore and expecting excuses from you Matthew and the whole ftp-master team for their discrimination of me. Your emails have never had a friendly tone, despite the way you put friendly at the bottom of every one of them. -- Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception. -- Mark Twain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
I'm quite unhappy that this thread has turned so bad. Please, all of us who are part of this thread, can we please try to get the heat out. I can't agree more. What I have seen up to now is make me very sad. Seeing Sven considering to resign is sad news for me. I won't play the others started first game, I leave this to my kids (well, probably even the youngest of them wouldn't play this game anymore). Up to now, I have seen very rude and unacceptable mails addressed directly to Sven Luther. There has been other rude mails sent to other people as well which is obviously unacceptable as well (no, Sven, not necessary from you). And I certainly missed a lot of other crap because I have read about 5% of these threads. The most difficult thing to do, especially by mail, is just recognizing that one went too far or just that you are wrong. Several people went too far in this thread. I think all should really consider doing what adult and mature people would do : just apologize, take a break and avoid definitive statementsand continue working in this project, because sometimes our arguments are not only out weakness but our strength. I don't agree with several things written by Sven here or there. I probably agree with a lot of others...and I just don't understand another bunch of such things. I have seen serious attempts to make proposals which seems quite constructive to me. I also have seen probably far too much mails (sorry, Sven, but IMHO you really should have slowed your contribution to all threads but, well, ce qui est fait est fait) But even what I may not agree with does not prevent me to consider that losing his valuable input is not good for this project, just like losing the work of any individual involved here would be bad. OK, people, as far as I have seen we are all supposed to be adult people herenot in a kind of kindergarten. So, who starts and just makes one or two steps backward. And, please no He should do so first answerfor $deity's sake, please be adult. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: *** SPAM *** Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 05:10:12PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote: * Matthew Wilcox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050321 17:05]: I'm not going to volunteer for them as I intend to leave Debian shortly after sarge releases. Why do you intend to leave Debian? The Vancouver meeting summary upset me, not because of the proposals to drop architectures, but because it contained a reminder of the Social Contract changes. The project is moving to what I believe to be a ridiculously extremist position. I can't support the new Social Contract, and wouldn't sign up for it if I were going through NM right now. So the only honourable thing for me to do is resign at the point when it come into effect. It saddens me greatly that we've come to this situation. I've been proud to be a Debian Developer for the past 6 years. I'd like to say, as others have when resigning, that I will continue to run Debian on my machines, but I can't. Moving documentation to non-free makes Debian a less suitable distribution for me. I shall have to look around and see what other distributions suit my needs. I'd like to thank my friends in Debian who've made it worth working on. Those who've been involved in the PA-RISC port (which I first joined Debian to work on). The Apache team have done a fantastic job, and I'm proud of how that worked out. I didn't realise how emotionally attached I was until I came to write this mail. I really wish things could have worked out better. -- Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception. -- Mark Twain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 06:34:00PM +0100, Christian Perrier wrote: I'm quite unhappy that this thread has turned so bad. Please, all of us who are part of this thread, can we please try to get the heat out. I can't agree more. What I have seen up to now is make me very sad. Seeing Sven considering to resign is sad news for me. ... Thanks for this, it is hearthening (or however you say that in english). I should really not have participated in that thread (and i resent a bit to Steve for it), and i am probably better of not following debian-devel, as i had not done for ages before. Still i believe i have made some constructive proposals, and even if my first posts may have been a bit too aggressive, for which i apologize, or too many, i think it is also a prove of the passion which lies on this issue. Something which has the potential to affect many of what we believe debian is, and which is handled by utter contempt, at least in the initial posting. Still hurt though, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels (Was: Re: NEW handling ...)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matthew Wilcox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Matthew, I didn't realise how emotionally attached I was until I came to write this mail. I really wish things could have worked out better. Although I am quite puzzled by the way you treated Sven a couple of hours ago, I must say that it'd be sad to see you resign. We've already lost too many DDs for no reason, and the Vancouver proposal will probably lead to the loss of another batch of DDs. But, it hasn't come into effect yet, and it's not sure it ever will. As for the SC, it can still be reverted to the old wording; that'll take a GR, of course. Leaving because the Project goes in a direction that's against your ideas (and against the Project's own ideas and values, fwiw) just doesn't help. Adrian Bunk can tell you about that (Adrian, you should really come back, btw). Fighting for your ideas would be the right thing to do, here and now. JB. - -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/ iD8DBQFCPycbzWFP1/XWUWkRAh8LAJ4mkyXj3Ux5hp8aex2Lae+6AxNXMACeNOfn Hn/99k0Lx5cRQIJ9NgYTyUA= =J+oP -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
