Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED] (va, manoj)> wrote: > On Sat, 28 May 2005 11:47:50 +0100, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > Is the stable release manager still offering debian services and > > wants listing on w.d.o/c? > Have you asked?
I've already written as much. You don't know either, eh? > >> Why is there such a stringent requirement for a email address > >> anyway? > > See my other email on this topic for two reasons. > Your other email on the topic said this: [quotes email with no reasons] > Which also fails to explain why the Debian project is > insisting on a business plan that requires the use of email/ Not surprising when you reference the wrong email. Try http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/05/msg00127.html which you've already seen, but seemed to ignored the reasons. > >> Why can't interested parties pone the consultant directly? > > Expense. Why can't consultants send in their email addresses? > Since they choose to only spend their time dealing with people > who are either in the area or are committed enough to spend the > money? I would expect a listing on the global debian web site is not very interesting to those two types. Also, may the listing maintainers decide that they do not want to spend the resources (not just money) chasing hard-to-reach consultants? I'm sure I read lessons from you about the problems of forcing a DD to do a particular task in a particular way. Why are you now trying to bounce consultants@ into following your view? > Since they do not want to face the Spam? I have more sympathy for this (a listing on w.d.o does attract some extra spam) but not being on the site doesn't bring no spam, so we should probably all use whatever anti-spam measures we choose. > Since when does the Project decide to dictate business plans? It hasn't. Since when do business plans dictate Project behaviour? > And why is the project discriminating against business plans? It discriminates against business plans that make debian work harder, just as it does in so many other ways. > Who made this decision? Luk and whoever else is maintaining the listing. If you want to try to reverse their decision, you of all people should know how. The move towards this has been a lot more open for longer than some other parts of debian. At least they tried to build a consensus and explain questionable points, then tried to compromise on disputed points. > [...] Liking a policy, since one has spent eons of time crafting > one, is to be expected. You seem ignorant: to be clear, it is not a policy I shaped much and I definitely didn't spend eons on it. I responded to some consultations about it and I think it's the best offer so far. Like Steve Langasek, you have suggested no improvement or fix which doesn't reopen other bugs. > Defending it it willynilly despite flaws is > silly. Flaming people pointing them out is idiotic. [...] I have not flamed you yet, despite your linguistic pyrotechnics. -- MJ Ray (slef), K. Lynn, England, email see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
