On 3/2/24 21:29, Andreas Tille wrote:
sphinxtesters (0.2.3-4) unstable; urgency=medium
* Revert attempt by a rogue developer to hijack this package
-- Sandro Tosi<mo...@debian.org> Sun, 14 Jan 2024 01:25:23 -0500
I wonder how the attribute 'rogue' is supported by the discussion above,
nor where the intention to hijack the package is inferred from.
On 3/2/24 21:29, Andreas Tille wrote:
> In my view, this crosses the line
It does cross the line.
On 3/2/24 21:29, Andreas Tille wrote:
> and I am grateful to have been part of teams where such
> incidents were not tolerated.
IMO, this shouldn't be tolerated in this team either. Even if Sandro is
doing awesome work in the team.
I'm btw hereby sending warm thanks to Sandro for his huge work that I
very much respect, despite all of this thread and other events. I
remember the huge amount of uploads when we removed Python 2 from
Debian, tirelessly doing things on the correct order, in a technically
near perfect way, when I didn't dare to touch this puzzle ...
But it's not an excuse to create a toxic atmosphere. This has been
hashed multiple times in many areas in Debian: doing a lot of (good)
packaging work doesn't grant anyone the right to disrespect others.
On 3/2/24 22:11, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> I understand your argument to be:
>
> I did not follow the team policy and didn't care about the other
> people involved to rectify the error. They were upset about this, so
> clearly this mess is all their fault. We should change the rules so
> that I won't have been wrong.
>
> I absolutely do not know how to respond to that level of entitlement.
> Hopefully I have misunderstood what you are trying to communicate?
I strongly do not agree with the above. You wrote it as if what
triggered Sandro was Andreas not willing to "rectify the error". That's
not what's happened: Sandro was harsh with Andreas to begin with, and
that is the reason Andreas wasn't motivated to "fix" what he saw as
cosmetic metadata in d/control for a weird policy of packages "half
belonging to the team", rather than an important bugfix.
The way you wrote it, it feels like you're only blaming Andreas for what
he did: I wouldn't do that, but that is ok, it's your opinion. But it
feels you're saying his bad behavior is an excuse for changing the
policy, and that, I do not agree, this isn't what's happening.
We should change the policy, but that's not so that Andreas "won't have
been wrong". It is because at least 3 persons (including myself and
Andreas) in this thread missed the point we're willing to remove. It is
because having a package "half in the team" doesn't make sense. And it
is because of many other points we already discussed in this thread. I
don't understand why are you making such a shortcut, when you already
agreed to these other points.
I'm sure you also notice part of this thread is also about Sandro's
communication style. My view (which I believe is shared by others) is
that Andreas is a nice person that deserves respect. It's unfortunate
that the sphinxtesters uploads were the tiger of this policy change,
though we need to take a step back, and understand the policy was bad
anyways.
So indeed, we have read the same things, but have very different
perspectives. None of them are completely wrong, we simply have very
different feelings. And despite all of this, it's a good thing you also
agree to get rid of this part of this policy.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
