Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
> = > BEGIN BALLOT > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > A: Decline to overrule or issue advice > N: None of the above > > END BALLOT > = A > N signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
* Sean Whitton [2024-08-06 20:33]: = BEGIN BALLOT The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on the issues concerning /etc/os-release. A: Decline to overrule or issue advice N: None of the above END BALLOT = I vote A > N There is a trade-off between conflicting technical goals here, and I would not mind if the solution space is explored further, but I don't think there are grounds for overruling the base-files maintainer. Cheers Timo -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ╭╮ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ │ Timo Röhling │ ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ │ 9B03 EBB9 8300 DF97 C2B1 23BF CC8C 6BDD 1403 F4CA │ ⠈⠳⣄ ╰╯ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 at 16:57, Christoph Berg wrote: > > Re: Luca Boccassi > > > BEGIN BALLOT > > > > > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > > > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > > > > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > > > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > > > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > > > Seriously? In https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#368 > > you say that you could rule on the general statement rather than a > > specific implementation, then I answer "I'd prefer that if it was > > possible", and this is how you respond? I've asked multiple times > > exactly what it is that you need in order to make a decision, and all > > I get in response are first cryptic and contradicting statements, and > > then this abrupt dismissal. This seriously feels like something out of > > Kafka novel. > > I vote A > N. > > Luca: people would be much more likely to act positively on your > requests if you wouldn't call them Kafkaesque. I described the experience of this process as kafkaesque as a response to the dismissal, not before it, so unless it went through a mail relay in Winden that seems unlikely, among other things because of the principle of causality. And I think describing as kafkaesque the experience of being told "Yeah we can do X" ---> "You will now be punished for asking to do X" seems quite charitable to me as a description. Ironically, telling me the dismissal is because of this even though it happened before makes it feel even _more_ kafkaesque. I still haven't got the faintest clue what exactly is that you need in a proposal to consider it. I even thought about providing references and documentation for how other distributions with similar bodies provide a much more well defined engineering process for such proposals, so that even mere mortals like myself can actually understand it and use it productively, as a possible source of inspiration for constructive feedback, but what's the point? It's just going to go into /dev/null anyway. My takeway from this whole thing is that it's a waste of time to reach out to the TC, and it's best to just ignore it. Live and learn, I suppose.
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
Hi Sean (2024.08.06_21:33:39_+0900) > = > BEGIN BALLOT > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > A: Decline to overrule or issue advice > N: None of the above > > END BALLOT > = I vote: A > N I have not caught up on all of the bug reading, yet. But enough to understand that there are good reasons to decline overruling. Stefano -- Stefano Rivera http://tumbleweed.org.za/ +1 415 683 3272 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
Re: Luca Boccassi > > BEGIN BALLOT > > > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > Seriously? In https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#368 > you say that you could rule on the general statement rather than a > specific implementation, then I answer "I'd prefer that if it was > possible", and this is how you respond? I've asked multiple times > exactly what it is that you need in order to make a decision, and all > I get in response are first cryptic and contradicting statements, and > then this abrupt dismissal. This seriously feels like something out of > Kafka novel. I vote A > N. Luca: people would be much more likely to act positively on your requests if you wouldn't call them Kafkaesque. Christoph signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
Hi, On 06/08/2024 13:33, Sean Whitton wrote: = BEGIN BALLOT The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on the issues concerning /etc/os-release. A: Decline to overrule or issue advice N: None of the above END BALLOT = I vote A > N. A bit of me wants to say something more positive about the current unstable/testing lack-of-distinction, but perhaps you are right it is better to leave that for now. Regards, Matthew OpenPGP_signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
Hello, On Tue 06 Aug 2024 at 01:53pm +01, Luca Boccassi wrote: > Seriously? In https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#368 > you say that you could rule on the general statement rather than a > specific implementation, then I answer "I'd prefer that if it was > possible", and this is how you respond? I've asked multiple times > exactly what it is that you need in order to make a decision, and all > I get in response are first cryptic and contradicting statements, and > then this abrupt dismissal. This seriously feels like something out of > Kafka novel. In the message you linked to, I said that we *could* issue a general statement, but I also indicated clearly that I didn't think we *should*. -- Sean Whitton
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 at 13:36, Sean Whitton wrote: > > Hello, > > I call for votes on the following: > > = > BEGIN BALLOT > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. Seriously? In https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#368 you say that you could rule on the general statement rather than a specific implementation, then I answer "I'd prefer that if it was possible", and this is how you respond? I've asked multiple times exactly what it is that you need in order to make a decision, and all I get in response are first cryptic and contradicting statements, and then this abrupt dismissal. This seriously feels like something out of Kafka novel.
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 08:33:39PM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote: > Hello, > > I call for votes on the following: > > = > BEGIN BALLOT > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > A: Decline to overrule or issue advice > N: None of the above > > END BALLOT > = > > I'm calling for this vote in the interest of saving people's time -- I > think there may be enough TC members who have already made up their > minds about this. I vote A > N. Helmut signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
[resending signed] On Tue 06 Aug 2024 at 08:33pm +08, Sean Whitton wrote: > = > BEGIN BALLOT > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > A: Decline to overrule or issue advice > N: None of the above > > END BALLOT > = I vote A > N -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
On Tue 06 Aug 2024 at 08:33pm +08, Sean Whitton wrote: > = > BEGIN BALLOT > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > A: Decline to overrule or issue advice > N: None of the above > > END BALLOT > = I vote A > N -- Sean Whitton
Bug#1077764: Call for votes: don't issue any ruling
Hello, I call for votes on the following: = BEGIN BALLOT The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on the issues concerning /etc/os-release. A: Decline to overrule or issue advice N: None of the above END BALLOT = I'm calling for this vote in the interest of saving people's time -- I think there may be enough TC members who have already made up their minds about this. If any TC members wants to speak up to cancel the call for votes then I'll also withdraw my ballot option, so that we go back to discussion. -- Sean Whitton signature.asc Description: PGP signature
