Re: [gnu.misc.discuss,gnu.emacs.gnus] Free software: Packagers vs Developers
On Tue, Jul 06, 1999 at 11:05:36AM +0200, Per Abrahamsen wrote:
> I think that you can percieve this "implication" is symptom of the
> Debian Attitude Problem, which perhaps makes it more difficult for
> Debian maintainers to address process problems.
Then why don't you try harder to convince us that you are right?
I've never known repeating the same points over and over to be an
effective tactics - however, most of the time I've managed to convince
people by finding another angle to my point every time they don't get it.
That's what I've been trying to do in our private conversation, but
you seem to ignore most of my attempts.
Why don't you try to have a covnversation instead of repeating the same
story over and over again?
I've been asking you, why do you think it's the process that's flawed and
not the people involved with your problemous situations? I haven't heard
an aswer from you. Or rather, I don't see your answer's point - care to
enlighten me and the rest of us?
> Obviously, any critique of the Debian process must be due to
> ignorance.
Obviously, you must be so fond of yourself that no-one but you can be
right.
An insult for insult - is that what you're after?
> It is legal so it ethical.
If it's legal but not ethical, then the law must be changed.
> The Debian maintainers are "middlemen" in that
> the users don't interact directly with developers, but instead with
> the some men in the middle.
Nothing is forcing the upstream developers and the users to go through the
Debian maintainer.
> The history is lost.
The BTS does preserve the history of a particular bug report.
[when]
> a middleman interferes, this become either guesswork or much slower.
Not true.
- ajk, catching up on the mail backlog
Reply to: