John Hasler <jhas...@newsguy.com> writes: > lee wrote: >> Mike McGinn writes: >> As in any sane system of governance for this type of organization, the >> ones doing the work get to make the decisions. > > lee wrote: >> Then please modify Debians' social contract where it says that the users >> are the priority. > > It says users are the priority. It doesn't say they are in charge. It > means that the developers are to consider the users when making > decisions.
I've been wondering what Debian proposes or has in place to figure out what the needs of the users are. And perhaps someone can explain in which way the users were considered when the decision was made that systemd shall become the default init system for Debian. Once that has been explained, the users can decide whether they have been sufficiently considered or not in this decision. What is Debian proposing or what does it have in place to become aware of such decision of the users so that Debian can act accordingly? What are the users supposed to do when they feel that they haven't sufficiently been considered? Or do you mean to say that allowing the users to decide whether they have been sufficiently considered or not would put them in charge too much? OTOH, how can the users be the priority when they aren't in charge? And being in charge means responsibility in the first place. -- Knowledge is volatile and fluid. Software is power. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87tx3x539f....@yun.yagibdah.de
