Re: Q to all candidates: dropping SC §5

[Mehdi Dogguy <mehdi@dogguy.org>]

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 02:37:12PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@debian.org> wrote:
> - I don't think the analogy with debian-multimedia is pertinent. At all.
>   The problem with debian-multimedia.org was that the agenda of the
>   people behind that 3rd party repository was completely unaligned (if
>   not even conflicting, at times) with the agenda of the corresponding
>   Debian team under debian.org. Things would be completely different if
>   people behind debian.org and (hypothetically) non-free.org were to
>   work in concert, with an agreement of what belongs there.
> 

You seem to be a real fan of the tautology club ;) as you say (after
major rephrasing): "If the situation is okay, then it will be okay".
I don't see any guarantee to have people behind debian.org and
(hypothetically) some-another-non-free.org work in concert. If it
doesn't happen, then we will face similar issues as the ones we faced
with debian-multimedia. This is part of our history now and we can
surely learn from past experiences to be able to handle similar
situations better in the future. But there is still some risk to see
such initiative go out of our control if "their" agenda doesn't match
ours.

I agree that it is an hypothetical situation, but so is yours. So I
don't agree on the fact the analogy is not pertinent here. It really
does, but it is important to keep that in mind to not be trapped once
again.

Regards,

-- 
Mehdi Dogguy