Hi, On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 06:43:26PM +0300, Hakan Bayındır wrote: > > > > On 9 Jul 2026, at 16:55, Antonio Terceiro <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 09:58:13AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 05:20:02PM -0700, Soren Stoutner wrote: > >>> On Monday, July 6, 2026 2:04:44 PM Mountain Standard Time Marco d'Itri > >>> wrote: > >>>> On Jul 06, Marco d'Itri <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> Do you mind removing "Debian might follow the same path" from your site? > >>>> > >>>> For the records, he refused. > >>> > >>> As a fellow Debian Developer, I find that concerning. > >> > >> Me too. Do we have any leverage against a DD who makes false claims about > >> the project on their private web page? > > > > I'm sorry but this is being blown out of proportion. Saying that > > something might happen in the future is clearly someone's opinion (or > > goal!) and needs no policing. > > > > I have no particular sympathy for this "rewrite it in X" fad, but we > > don't know, maybe at some point of the future, rust coreutils may be > > better than GNU coreutils, or maybe not. That's clearly not the case > > today, and if it is someday, a replacement will surely go though a long > > and devastating discussion that will stress us all, before actually > > happening. In the meantime, let people experiment. > > I understand where you are coming from. I’m not completely disagreeing with > you, and I’m all for experimenting as well; however, I see a trend of pushing > things further and further. The behavior of not being aggressive on the > surface, not saying anything strong, but doing the opposite, has great > potential to divide people and apparently bothers some of us. It bothers me > for sure. > > Yes, Open/Free Software circles are not easy places to be, and the mode of > discussion sometimes resembles a flaming mosh pit. On the other hand, I > believe we can exercise a little more agency and show more respect for each > other’s views. > > Yes, writing forward-looking statements in a project page might not be > technically wrong, and we should respect the choice. On the other hand, when > people bring up their discomfort and highlight its dangers, those who do so > command the same respect. Dismissing views and possible dangers is not the > right thing to do here. > > Let me put another forward-looking statement: Big Linux vendors might stop > sharing source packages for their versions of uutils, and may even bake in > DRM and/or “user-watching analytics” features into them to TiVoize their > distributions, effectively making them non-free. This possibility bothers me. > While I have nothing about the author(s) of uutils (I don’t know them to > begin with), the possibility of this bothers me a lot. Do we want Debian to > be one of these vendors, enabling this possibility? Where does it place > Debian in relation to its motto, “The Universal Operating System”? > > Am I (or others putting this possibility forward) blowing this out of > proportion, too? > > Even if we’re going to have this “devastating” discussion, we can address > these questions in a kind and considerate manner. While I see no reason to > light the mailing list ablaze (it’s summer and hot already), I see no reason > to desert the subject completely either. > > Kind regards,
I just wanted to say that I really resonate with the above. Thank you for voicing your thoughts in such a kind and considerate way. I don't see the whole situation as a big deal for now. However, I would have expected a fellow DD to take a step back and make slight changes to the wording on their project's website to avoid ambiguity and division. It didn't happen, but Debian can live with that, I guess :\ Bests, -- Tiago Bortoletto Vaz https://tvaz.cc
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
