Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 08:09:09PM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 01.01.2020, 11:19 -0600 schrieb John Hasler: > > andrew.mcglashan wrote: > > > ...it is very limited to a small group of Debian users known > > > collectively as DDs... > > It is limited to the people who actually do the work. Why should the > > fact that you chose to download, install, and use some software that > > someone wrote and generously made available to you for free give you any > > right to participate in their decisions as to what to do next. > Even if users don't have voting rights we bound ourselves to them by the > Debian > Social Contract: "4. Our priorities are our users and free software [..]" to > which all DDs agreed (myself included). Right; so since all DDs are bound by this social contract, including when we are voting in GRs, there is no need for more direct franchisement of users in the decision-making processes since we are all acting in users' interests. > So there must be ways for our users to participate in the decision making. All users, or just the vocal minority? > Your view might reflect the current reality but it is not what we have signed > up for. The Social Contract only says that users are our priority. It does not say that we should implement any particular method of soliciting their input on decisions. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Daniel writes: > Even if users don't have voting rights we bound ourselves to them by > the Debian Social Contract: "4. Our priorities are our users and free > software [..]" to which all DDs agreed (myself included). So there > must be ways for our users to participate in the decision making. As Sam and Roberto explain below (doing a much better job than I did), there are, nor did I intend to imply that there were not. There are no *formal* ones such as participation in GRs. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 02:09:46PM -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > [stuff] I just saw Sam's message after I sent my own. I agree that this discussion has gone past the point where it is useful. Apologies for the noise. -- Roberto C. Sánchez
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 04:51:14AM +1100, Andrew McGlashan wrote: > Hi, > > On 2/1/20 4:19 am, John Hasler wrote: > > andrew.mcglashan wrote: > >> ...it is very limited to a small group of Debian users known > >> collectively as DDs... > > > > It is limited to the people who actually do the work. Why should > > the fact that you chose to download, install, and use some software > > that someone wrote and generously made available to you for free > > give you any right to participate in their decisions as to what to > > do next. > > > > I'm not happy with some of the choices Debian has made recently but > > my opinion about such things became irrelevant when I resigned from > > the project. Ranting about them here and indignantly accusing the > > DDs of ignoring me would be ridiculous. > > You simplify things too much and therefore cheapen the project and > it's wide ranging participants (not just DDs, but also including DDs) > quite considerably. > It is quite the opposite, really. The Debian project has a consensus building mechanism which has evolved over more than 25 years. Is it perfect? No. However, it is quite a bit more effective* than any similar process of which I am aware or with which I have been involved. * Depending on the definition of "effective", to be sure. The Apache Software Foundation, the Gnome Foundateion, and the Eclipse Foundation, just to name a few examples, have rather different process than Debian and there are certainly those who would praise the effectiveness of each project's processes compared to the processes of the other projects. My thought is that Debian's process is the most democratic and that, given the size of the project, it has so far scaled well with the project. We are not well organized for a mechanism based more on representation of constituencies, but other projects are and such mechanisms suit them. > There are very different types of investments in Debian at play here; > it isn't just "those that do the work", it is also "those that USE the > work" that help with possible bug reports and other things that enrich > the project. If Debian were a commercial project and users paid for use licenses or support contracts, then your argument would be much stronger. As it is, the "currency" of the Debian project is contributions of various forms (e.g., code, patches, help resolving bug reports, writing documentation, managing web content, managing infrastructure, etc.). While every user is appreciated, I do not consider that someone simply downloading and using Debian adds any value. It is when that person, persons, or group makes an effort to improve Debian that value is added. > Advocates for Debian, of which there were many more > before the more recent changes are also very important for the entire > project's ongoing success well in to the future. > Citation, please. Note that academic peer-reviewed studies would carry the most weight, followed by reputable journalistic work, and rantings of individuals via mailing lists and blogs carry the least weight. You may be experiencing the fallacious thought process that every person who takes a negative stance or stops advocating for Debian represents a net "loss" to the project; stated another way, it is entirely possible that for every "loss" of an advocate that there is a corresponding "gain". Hence why something like an academic peer-reviewed study or thorough investigative journalistic piece would be ways of assessing the validity of your statement and why blog articles would not. > Debian should be so much more than what DDs alone make of it, not > being so at any point in time affords considerable disrespect for > others involved over time as advocates, users and even ex-DDs. Given that the Debian Project is made up of imperfect people, the project itself is also imperfect. That said, Point 4 of the Debian Social Contract [0] is "Our priorities are our users and free software". I've not been involved in Debian quite as long as some others, but during the years which I have been involved I have found that Debian adheres to the above stated principle quite well. Since the Debian project has so many mechanisms outside of the GR mechanism, the idea that Debian is not already "so much more than what the DDs alone make of it" is rather disingenuous. Based on your messages in this thread it is clear that you are personally hurt by some of the decisions that the project has made. That is unfortunate, but it does not grant you license to dismiss the extraordinary hard work of so many people... > Did > Debian choose to stop being the universal Linux? If so, when? Is it > choosing that now? > The Debian project has not chosen any such thing now nor in the past; I would expect that it would not in the future. Note that it is certainly possible to argue that any number of decisions are effectively a choice to "stop being the universal OS"; for example, dropping official
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Am Mittwoch, den 01.01.2020, 11:19 -0600 schrieb John Hasler: > andrew.mcglashan wrote: > > ...it is very limited to a small group of Debian users known > > collectively as DDs... > > It is limited to the people who actually do the work. Why should the > fact that you chose to download, install, and use some software that > someone wrote and generously made available to you for free give you any > right to participate in their decisions as to what to do next. Even if users don't have voting rights we bound ourselves to them by the Debian Social Contract: "4. Our priorities are our users and free software [..]" to which all DDs agreed (myself included). So there must be ways for our users to participate in the decision making. Your view might reflect the current reality but it is not what we have signed up for. Regards, Daniel signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Dear Andrew: I appreciate that you are hurt and frustrated. We hear your hurt and frustration. Discussions of the sort of broad decision making processes within the Debian Project you are talking about are off-topic for the debian-devel mailing lists. There are places where you could bring up the idea that Debian should use a different decision making process and should enfranchise more stakeholders. If you were respectful and in particular respected the diversity of opinions on whether this is a good idea, such a discussion would be welcome in the appropriate forum. Even within the current system, there are things you could do to increase the influence Devuan has in the Debian community. As an example, if you know of Devuan developers who have contributed to Debian and who are interested in finding common ground, please talk to them about whether it would make sense for them to also apply to be Debian developers. I think that the discussion of who are the appropriate stakeholders as it is taking place on debian-devel has run further than it needs to run. Thank you for your consideration, Sam Hartman Debian Project Leader
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 2/1/20 4:47 am, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 08:25:41PM +1100, Andrew McGlashan wrote: >> And a propaganderous push, just accept it and STFU, systemd won, >> against all odds, just like other crazy political results around >> the world. > > right, systemd won, because of politics. LOLWUT, thanks for making > me laugh. Gee, you are easily amused, how about you think about ways that can improve all relations and interests of Debian; ways to enrich Debian for all users, not just a small select group? > thank god it had nothing to do with technology. I honestly don't think it is about technology; if it was, it should be more open to ensuring that there is a win/win/win situation and the little extra effort to broaden the scope of what is expected to make Debian better as time goes on. > Andrew, serious question: if you think this and switched to Devuan, > why do you care about Debian and post here? Wouldn't it be better > to improve Devuan and get some work done there? Or even improve > Debian, as that flows down to Devuan. You haven't read my posts over the years? Devuan, just like many other distros have a great reliance on Debian being the best that Debian can be. And it cannot be it's best if it lesesns it's appeal as the "universal Linux" that it proclaims to be. > I don't see how ranting about Debian and politics and manipulated > elections helps you to forward your goals (which I understand > include improving Devuan, which I think is a great goal). This is not about having a rant or a tanty, it is about improving processes so that ALL the reasonable stakeholders of the project can share in Debian's success and continue to make it better than can possibly be done via a vote of an extremely limited number of the entire Debian population. Kind Regards AndrewM -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgzduAAKCRCoFmvLt+/i ++APAP902qUNeUmoUTVURByaPRwR8bepx8tkT3AXoPfAk0c1ogEA1ixo02udlydC oUoQkFtvPhsJ/VIsj9yidIBGqUFyT68= =33d2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 2/1/20 4:19 am, John Hasler wrote: > andrew.mcglashan wrote: >> ...it is very limited to a small group of Debian users known >> collectively as DDs... > > It is limited to the people who actually do the work. Why should > the fact that you chose to download, install, and use some software > that someone wrote and generously made available to you for free > give you any right to participate in their decisions as to what to > do next. > > I'm not happy with some of the choices Debian has made recently but > my opinion about such things became irrelevant when I resigned from > the project. Ranting about them here and indignantly accusing the > DDs of ignoring me would be ridiculous. You simplify things too much and therefore cheapen the project and it's wide ranging participants (not just DDs, but also including DDs) quite considerably. There are very different types of investments in Debian at play here; it isn't just "those that do the work", it is also "those that USE the work" that help with possible bug reports and other things that enrich the project. Advocates for Debian, of which there were many more before the more recent changes are also very important for the entire project's ongoing success well in to the future. Debian should be so much more than what DDs alone make of it, not being so at any point in time affords considerable disrespect for others involved over time as advocates, users and even ex-DDs. Did Debian choose to stop being the universal Linux? If so, when? Is it choosing that now? These days, when a successful team wins at a sporting event, it encompasses all the participants and appreciates them all as contributing, it isn't just the on field players, even the on field players get [and deserve] most of the glory. Teams are made up of players in many fields, just peruse the credits at the end of movies, there are shed loads of people involved, one way or another. Do you think that any Debian advocate or user should not be able to be part of Debian's success without them needing to be DDs? That would be a very shallow view towards anyone not "elite" enough to be a DD. Remember, it isn't so much against DDs, not at all, it is more about the greater good of Debian and from a far more wide reaching view than the DDs alone can have. It is neigh on impossible for everyone to have a say, but it isn't beyond the realms just DDs to think beyond themselves and for the greater good of the project. Would you want a project that is only "good" for 1,100 to 1,200 DDs or would you want what has been Debian's goal of being a universal Linux, good for so many more? Let's be positive about this and find a way to be more inclusive of the greater Debian population; it should be a win for everyone. Kind Regards AndrewM -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgzcDQAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +8oWAP0Wzii0oKKqNMiggCQC2hDAZOqkCFS65oFgp7Br+CRpcAEAgsV4QETnRlig 9DHAgDNTpCxIj7OC2eExJ2r6/cF2I+4= =ewqU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
On Wed, Jan 01, 2020 at 08:25:41PM +1100, Andrew McGlashan wrote: > And a propaganderous push, just accept it and STFU, systemd won, against > all odds, just like other crazy political results around the world. right, systemd won, because of politics. LOLWUT, thanks for making me laugh. thank god it had nothing to do with technology. Andrew, serious question: if you think this and switched to Devuan, why do you care about Debian and post here? Wouldn't it be better to improve Devuan and get some work done there? Or even improve Debian, as that flows down to Devuan. I don't see how ranting about Debian and politics and manipulated elections helps you to forward your goals (which I understand include improving Devuan, which I think is a great goal). -- cheers, Holger --- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
andrew.mcglashan wrote: > ...it is very limited to a small group of Debian users known > collectively as DDs... It is limited to the people who actually do the work. Why should the fact that you chose to download, install, and use some software that someone wrote and generously made available to you for free give you any right to participate in their decisions as to what to do next. I'm not happy with some of the choices Debian has made recently but my opinion about such things became irrelevant when I resigned from the project. Ranting about them here and indignantly accusing the DDs of ignoring me would be ridiculous. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Martin, I didn’t say anybody should “shut up”, I said that if one is not able to respond with kindness and without a rage to a original message that asks for compassion and kindness, it would be better to not do so. Perhaps, write a separate email talking about how one feels or maybe just wait until one is not angry and filled with rage, and you have enough strength to put more kind words and understanding into your message. We should strongly work on stopping the spiral of hatred for the other groups and mend the cracks between us. Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý > On 1 Jan 2020, at 11:47, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > > If one outcome of the GR is to ask people to shut up… then… again as I > wrote in the other mail, I think it does not serve Debian's highest > good.
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
> On 1/1/20 9:46 pm, Martin Steigerwald wrote: >> I agree with Andrew that at least some of the options in the GR >> were not about diversity or inclusion, but about exclusion and the >> opposite of diversity. I pointed it out *clearly* before hand, but >> that was all I could do. > > Yes, but it's much more than that. The diversity in decisions > relating to Debian's future need to be able to be influenced by the > people and for the people -- not by the political classes. In this > case, the political classes are the DDs that have absolute privilege here. > > IOW, the GR process itself is severely flawed and it cannot, in it's > current state provide what is needed for Debian from the eyes of all > reasonable stakeholders, it is very limited to a small group of Debian > users known collectively as DDs .. the current "gods" of Debian whom > have ultimate power to do good or do bad with or for the project. > [Such] Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. So Debian is a volunteer project. We build an OS - together. Those who do the work get the say. And as far as our Social Contract goes, either there is a trust of the user base that we consider the needs of our users or they will go elsewhere. I think as Devuan has shown, they don't actually do the latter. And if they do, more power to them if that serves their need better. This is Free Software after all. If there is a greater need and valuable *actual new software* (like - from hearsay - elogind and opensysusers) as the output, someone who is intrigued by that can package and integrate it. Telling others to completely stifle any kind of progress because of almost religious[1] opposition is not acceptable. In every decision there will be people who feel misrepresented. Thus is democracy. In fact the outcome was not the absolutist Proposal F but the slightly more inclusive Proposal B. I think it is fair to assume that the world can move on and what we settle on a default that serves as the baseline for others to work against. There was clarity missing and I would expect that now the actual assumptions will be clarified in policy, as Russ already started in [2]. So there should be something to work against for alternative systems. Of course we can go and argue that only a small subset voted and if those people are the most active in the project. But I don't think that this is particularly useful distinction. For the best we know the others did not care enough to vote (or were unable to for technical reasons) and were thus ok with any outcome. Also we welcome people to join the project, if they do contribute in whatever way. And that comes with a vote. Kind regards Philipp Kern [1] I looked for a more neutral word here, but failed to find one. Please give me the benefit of the doubt, given that I am a non-native speaker. [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2019/12/msg00025.html
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Dear Andrej, dear Andrew, Andrej Shadura - 01.01.20, 13:02:00 CET: > On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 at 12:40, Andrew McGlashan > > wrote: > > reasonable stakeholders, it is very limited to a small group of > > Debian users known collectively as DDs .. the current "gods" of > > Debian whom have ultimate power to do good or do bad with or for > > the project. [Such] Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts > > absolutely. > You’re most obviously trolling. You clearly understand there has to be > a way to limit the number of people taking the decision and the > period of voting to prevent vote manipulations. I don’t believe you > don’t understand everyone can become a DD, but it’s the DDs who do > the majority of meaningful work in Debian. > > I’d like to ask everyone to stop feeding this troll, and if they > continue posting this, report them to the listmasters. Although I do not agree with the wording of the paragraph you quoted, I did not see it as trolling. Especially in the first paragraph that you did not quote, Andrej, I see a reasonable critique of the process. Swinging the "troll" hammer can be a form of violence, too. However both Andrew and you, Andrej: I recommend to both of you as you have now stated your point of view tough, to let it be as it is. Agree to disagree for me means letting the other point of view to be there *as it is*. And I believe it would not get better by elaborating it, at least not for now. Note that this recommendation in my eyes is different than the other two recommendations: By all means state your point of view, share your emotions in a respectful and harmless manner, but when you are done, let it be as it is, and see where this takes you. Additionally to Andrew: Regarding your wording in the last paragraph I strongly recommend to you to open up to the possibility at everyone here may act with the *best intentions*. I am sure that both Ondřej and Sam acted with the best intentions. So I would not assume them to somehow act in a "corrupted" way. In my eyes this part of your message has not been helpful. I believe it may have been harmful or hurtful to some. *Assume best intention* really goes a long way! I now apply the recommendation to let it sit for a while to myself as well. I have expressed my point of view as well – and I do not believe that there is much to gain by elaborating on it, as I think what I wrote has been clear. Luckily I am off to some other activity now. So I will not see this list for a while. Again: Have a Happy New Year, everyone! Best, -- Martin signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 1/1/20 11:02 pm, Andrej Shadura wrote: > On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 at 12:40, Andrew McGlashan > wrote: >> reasonable stakeholders, it is very limited to a small group of >> Debian users known collectively as DDs .. the current "gods" of >> Debian whom have ultimate power to do good or do bad with or for >> the project. [Such] Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts >> absolutely. > > You’re most obviously trolling. You clearly understand there has to > be a way to limit the number of people taking the decision and the > period of voting to prevent vote manipulations. I don’t believe you > don’t understand everyone can become a DD, but it’s the DDs who do > the majority of meaningful work in Debian. Wrong, I absolutely hate posting to any Debian list atm, not only because my point of view is too often ignored by those that should be most interested, but due to how DMARC settings mean that I'll get loads of reports due to how DMARC works with Debian lists at this time. So, if I post to Debian it is not to troll and I would never have that intent; it is to allow a possible alternative view that is valid to be able to be aired to those that really do matter... the users (collectively), of Debian -- in this case though, it is being limited to those in the one particular list that is debian-devel ... so it may mostly fall on deaf ears. It's no good preaching to the converted, unless there is a conscious and a will to do better. I hope that out of this will come a more reasonable method to properly determine the best way forward for the Debian project, which effects Devuan that I have chosen to move forward with. Devuan gives back to Debian and that is great, but it cannot be fully self supported, it needs to rely upon Debian -- so what Debian does, by whatever process, has direct relevance not only to those users of Debian (far more than the DDs here), but also to every other distro that also relies upon Debian to be a good upstanding distro that has continuing value to entire community [for Debian and beyond, go Buz Lightyear] and not just the DDs themselves. Kind Regards AndrewM -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgyNEgAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +9CKAQCp3nlcFF3sqFiM84qNQd+meAh13ngFEW7yhytydP745QD+KgsNKg4y48M5 CJVFfeFv+uw0ZVy62BnU/rE+lQTN5vA= =TLNI -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 1/1/20 9:46 pm, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > I agree with Andrew that at least some of the options in the GR > were not about diversity or inclusion, but about exclusion and the > opposite of diversity. I pointed it out *clearly* before hand, but > that was all I could do. Yes, but it's much more than that. The diversity in decisions relating to Debian's future need to be able to be influenced by the people and for the people -- not by the political classes. In this case, the political classes are the DDs that have absolute privilege her e. IOW, the GR process itself is severely flawed and it cannot, in it's current state provide what is needed for Debian from the eyes of all reasonable stakeholders, it is very limited to a small group of Debian users known collectively as DDs .. the current "gods" of Debian whom have ultimate power to do good or do bad with or for the project. [Such] Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Kind Regards AndrewM -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgyFOwAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +5hHAPkBUNV2V1eGzOIvB6WfEMngRtrNRIKMJgBLEmYDbHP2TwD+MOMU5mwk7PgU 5uBUuClrGyW6f44Ohl9UVdmivSGUCaI= =H6Sk -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Dear Ondřej, Ondřej Surý - 01.01.20, 09:39:35 CET: > Andrew, > > look at the subject, then look at what you wrote. If you can’t find > enough kindness in the situation and you are angry then it might be > better to not write anything at all. If one outcome of the GR is to ask people to shut up… then… again as I wrote in the other mail, I think it does not serve Debian's highest good. I agree with Andrew that at least some of the options in the GR were not about diversity or inclusion, but about exclusion and the opposite of diversity. I pointed it out *clearly* before hand, but that was all I could do. And I feel that Andrew has every right on this Earth to state this in a public mailing list on Debian. He did not say anything offensive or anything intended to hurt anyone or otherwise violating the Code of Conduct. So herewith I speak up for Andrew's right to voice his disappointment here as long as he does so within the Code of Conduct. "Being nice" is still something different than "shutting up". And asking someone to shut up in my point of view is not "being nice" to this person. That said, from the topic of your mail, it is about being "nice to your fellow Debian colleagues"… however we all know that your mail is related to the outcome of the GR and you even wrote so. Best, -- Martin
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
On 1/1/20 8:23 pm, Andrew McGlashan wrote: > Sorry, I don't believe the premise in the subject line, it doesn't seem > at all genuine to me; it is more like F you. And a propaganderous push, just accept it and STFU, systemd won, against all odds, just like other crazy political results around the world. A.
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Sorry, I don't believe the premise in the subject line, it doesn't seem at all genuine to me; it is more like F you.
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Andrew, look at the subject, then look at what you wrote. If you can’t find enough kindness in the situation and you are angry then it might be better to not write anything at all. Let me quote Neil Gaiman from his New Year’s Eve blogpost http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2019/12/a-new-years-thought.html?m=1 (read the full version...) [...] And I hope in the year to come you won't burn. And I hope you won't freeze. I hope you and your family will be safe, and walk freely in the world and that the place you live, if you have one, will be there when you get back. I hope that, for all of us, in the year ahead, kindness will prevail and that gentleness and humanity and forgiveness will be there for us if and when we need them. And may your New Year be happy, and may you be happy in it. I hope you make something in the year to come you've always dreamed of making, and didn't know if you could or not. But I bet you can. And I'm sure you will. Ondřej -- Ondřej Surý > On 1 Jan 2020, at 09:08, Andrew McGlashan > wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > > >> On 1/1/20 1:57 am, Aron Xu wrote: >> Some moments I felt quite heart broken to see Debian is at some >> level of risk that the project rarely faced before. We might hold >> different opinions, techinical or perceptional, such diversity is a >> strength of our community and we could to cherish it by being nice >> to our fellow people. > > Diversity? What a joke, sorry. But it is not very diverse or > inclusive when only a small select group of Debian users get to vote > on extremely important issues whilst the most significant majority of > Debian users are left out in the cold and have to live with it. > > A. > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgxTRwAKCRCoFmvLt+/i > +xvPAP9pdk4rPbshiI9ea8M4zwTymIOi9WPd9LoZ8CkFfl//wgEAsFXOFTC9xBfP > 92lkV8+PwEt353+/wU7yiHIpkpLNtis= > =QMMn > -END PGP SIGNATURE- >
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 1/1/20 1:57 am, Aron Xu wrote: > Some moments I felt quite heart broken to see Debian is at some > level of risk that the project rarely faced before. We might hold > different opinions, techinical or perceptional, such diversity is a > strength of our community and we could to cherish it by being nice > to our fellow people. Diversity? What a joke, sorry. But it is not very diverse or inclusive when only a small select group of Debian users get to vote on extremely important issues whilst the most significant majority of Debian users are left out in the cold and have to live with it. A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgxTRwAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +xvPAP9pdk4rPbshiI9ea8M4zwTymIOi9WPd9LoZ8CkFfl//wgEAsFXOFTC9xBfP 92lkV8+PwEt353+/wU7yiHIpkpLNtis= =QMMn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 5:00 AM Ondřej Surý wrote: > > Hi, > > the init systemd GR is over and we have reached the results in a democratic > way by following Debian Constitution. However following the process is > orthogonal to our opinions, positions we took, and our feelings. Now, more > than ever, it’s important to be nice to each other, have a lot of compassion > and not be condescending, whatever group you belong to. > > So, I am sending hugs to all my fellow Debian colleagues no matter whether > the are pro-systemd, anti-systemd, anything in between, or something > completely different. Happy new year to all of you and the Debian project as > whole. > Thank you for saying so. Some moments I felt quite heart broken to see Debian is at some level of risk that the project rarely faced before. We might hold different opinions, techinical or perceptional, such diversity is a strength of our community and we could to cherish it by being nice to our fellow people. Best regards, Aron
Re: Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Ondřej Surý wrote: > the init systemd GR is over and we have reached the results in a > democratic way by following Debian Constitution. However following the > process is orthogonal to our opinions, positions we took, and our > feelings. Now, more than ever, it’s important to be nice to each > other, have a lot of compassion and not be condescending, whatever > group you belong to. Well said. And for any worried by the result, or any who might be looking for signs of what future collaboration might look like, here's a bit of hope: gnome-session 3.34.2-1 and gnome-settings-daemon 3.34.2-1 were just uploaded today, adding support for elogind. I have hopes that Debian's vaunted and venerable development processes will continue to produce good results, and I hope that the new decade sees developers healing and recovering from the last. - Josh Triplett
Be nice to your fellow Debian colleagues
Hi, the init systemd GR is over and we have reached the results in a democratic way by following Debian Constitution. However following the process is orthogonal to our opinions, positions we took, and our feelings. Now, more than ever, it’s important to be nice to each other, have a lot of compassion and not be condescending, whatever group you belong to. So, I am sending hugs to all my fellow Debian colleagues no matter whether the are pro-systemd, anti-systemd, anything in between, or something completely different. Happy new year to all of you and the Debian project as whole. Ondřej -- Ondřej Surý
