>>"Raphael" == Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Raphael> You're getting ridiculous... check the FACTS, check what is
Raphael> the subject of the channel, check who is there and what they
Raphael> are doing.
At the last USENIX meeting, we had a room full of people,
talking about Debian, some of them were debian developers, we
conducted Debian related business, and there was a big sig next to
the door that said Debian.
I guess we now control paret of Marriott, eh?
Raphael> Tell me where else on the world you have such a
Raphael> concentration of people (more than a hundred at any time of
Raphael> the day) working for Debian, discussing debian's development
Raphael> apart from the debian mailing lists ?
#debian. #debian on EFNET, undernet, dalnet, etc, may also be
contenders. I would say that #debian has more people actively talkign
about Debian than any other channel.
Merely having a large number of people talking does not make
the organization they are talking about responsible for their conduct
(which is what you seem to be claiming).
Raphael> I believe that it is large enough and that we have enough
Raphael> people in that channel who are in charge of many *important*
Raphael> responsibilities in Debian (listmaster, ftpmaster,
Raphael> debian-admin, release manager, webmaster, dpkg maintainers,
Raphael> X maintainer, many other maintainers, ...).
Man, we surely *OWN* that univ in southern France where the
debian conference is held.
Raphael> You know the answers, as well as I do.
I am disputing the latter part of that sentence.
Raphael> My position is as legitimate as yours. Why should I have to
Raphael> justify that the channel is related to Debian ? Why wouldn't
Raphael> it be up to you to justify that it's unrelated to Debian ?
If ever I bring up a GR, rest assured it would not be half
baked, and I would indeed have justifications and rationale for
bringing the GR forth.
Raphael> Anyway what I meant is that i don't need to prove that
Raphael> #debian-devel is debian related and that it can be made
Raphael> official. If you can prove the contrary well, let's prove it
Raphael> and I'll see if someone convinced me of it.
Again, you seem to not understand what it means when one tries
to propose a change in the working of a project -- a major change,
like the conduct rules you are imposing on third party forums. You do
indeed have the burden of proof.
Raphael> Why should we have to answer this question now ? you may use
Raphael> your opinion on this point, to help you decide how you will
Raphael> vote...
Since when have we worked under the assumption that voting is
anything but the last resort?
Raphael> - official means "documented" and therefore #debian-devel
Raphael> would follow the policy that Debian has decided for it
Raphael> (and I propose the "open" policy that let operators kick
Raphael> only on signal/noise consideration)
If it were this easy, well. We have 170 developers living in
the US. Very few countries have these numbers. Perhaps we can now
make policy outlawing the DMCA, the munitions laws, etc? Sure the US
has to follow these rules, since we have 170 people conductiong
Debian business in there?
Raphael> Now, since neither Branden, nor Wichert felt the reason to
Raphael> answer in this thread (and since people think that they are
Raphael> those who are able to make a decision on this point (being
Raphael> channel operator and channel founder)), I think that they
Raphael> silently acknowledge the way I followed to resolve this
Raphael> issue.
This is as free from logic as the rest of your assertions seem
to be.
Raphael> Actually, I really wonder who is the more bureaucratic of
Raphael> us. I'd just like to settle on this issue. You want people
Raphael> to get over a complete philosophical study when common sense
Raphael> should apply ...
I understand you would just want people to rubber stamp more
rules thoughtlessly, and then hit people on the head with them
forever (since removing established practice is harder). I prefer to
actually think though the reasons, and see if we actually need more
rules of conduct, and not just ``settle on this issue'' with no
thought whatsoever.
Raphael> If you could concentrate on the real issue, that would be better.
I think the real issue here is that we have a incompletely
considered, ineffective, frivolous GR on our hands; it is hard to
conceive how we can stop wasting time by considering this in the
first place. You probably brought this GR to make an end run around
OPN policies, annoyed by branden (it is easy to be annoyed by
branden). There. I have concentrated on the real issue; I doubt you
shall like this any better.
Raphael> debian-devel is commonly used to comment the content of the
Raphael> mailing list, and if anything interesting is discovered on
Raphael> IRC, it will be summarized or explained on the corresponding
Raphael> mailing list.
I see. Since it has so rarely happened in the past, either
this statement is not true, or very little real discussion happens on
the channels. If the former, how do you intend to correct this? Do
you have people committed to making logs of and summarizing the
channel in a timely fashion? or is i=this yet another hand waving
statement? If the latter, it seems to m,e since no real business is
transacted there anyway, it need not be ``officialized' (sic)
Raphael> Of course, some subjects may only be discussed on IRC, but
Raphael> that should be considered like 2 or 3 developers discussing
Raphael> a Debian problem via private mail.
BTW, that is how I think this IRC channel should be
treated. Private, offline communication between developers.
Raphael> If it concerns other developers, or if that information
Raphael> needs to be shared, they'll do so on a mailing list.
So, if it is important, and we need to actually reliavly
contact people, we still need to use email. I think giving a patina
of legitimacy to the IRC channel, given that less than 15% of the
developers are (active) on it, is only going to reduce hamper
communication within the project.
manoj
--
A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it. Oscar
Wilde, "The Portrait of Mr. W.H."
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
