Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Anybody who has to ask "Why should I/we/they contribute?" is not >suitable for Debian. (The "answer", incidentally, is "because we can" >or "because it's there", or some other variation; it is a goal in >itself, and not a means to an end)
OK, now *that* is just nonsense. People contribute because they: * use Debian and want to make it better * want to contribute something to a project they respect * want to do something which is made easier by contributing to Debian * want to help out Debian users * want to help promote the goals of Debian I'm sure there are other reasons. "Because it's there" is a non-reason. OK, maybe it was a reasonable (if silly) answer for why to climb Mt. Everest. But Debian isn't a natural feature of the landscape, and it certainly isn't an exceptional and notable one. (Real reasons for climbing Mt. Everest included "I like climbing mountains" and "It's the tallest mountain in the world", which were both implicitly understood.) That 'reason' isn't going to get *anyone* to contribute to Debian. It might get them to climb Mt. Everest, I suppose. You give an actual reason later in the same mail message: >Having some specific, valuable things they want to contribute would be >a good one Which makes your bizarre claim up above all the weirder. Perhaps what you meant to say was: "I want contributors to have something specific and valuable which they want to contribute. If they don't already have such a thing, they shouldn't contribute." Which I can understand, given that it's very easy to find things for which help is wanted in Debian. The general complaint, however, is that people offering help which they think is useful get ignored, or even worse, get hostile responses attacking them personally. This certainly doesn't happen with all or even most of Debian, but it seems to happen with distressing regularity in some areas. -- Nathanael Nerode <neroden at gcc.gnu.org> http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html