Assume the demarcated hypothetical scenario to be true for the questions which follow.
===BEGIN ALLEGORY=== I spend the next several hours sending Andrew Suffield chain letters that say "if you don't fix tla by Thursday, your liver will transform into mascarpone." I send these emails without making use of Debian infrastructure, so as to not violate the DMUP.
At this point, hypothetical you should grow up, and the DAMs should perhaps reconsider whether you can work with the rest of the project.
Andrew buries his face in a pillow and cries until Saturday, at which point he realizes that his liver is normal.
And hypothetical Andrew should be less crazy.
Fuming with rage, he then declares to his favorite stuffed animal that, henceforth, he will ignore any bug I file. Furthermore, he will ignore any bug that anyone else files on tla, and will refuse to do any work on tla.
At some point after this, the QA/MIA team should notice and take an interest.
He does not announce this publicly, but his stuffed animal leaks this information to a select few other developers, and the rumor makes its way to the DPL.
At this point you should see a psychiatrist and get some help about your concerns that stuffed animals might leak your secrets.
When others offer to NMU tla, he informs them that it is his package and they must keep their grubby little paws away from it.
As long as you don't screw the package up or make gratuitious changes or otherwise do stupid things that violate the NMU policy, it doesn't much matter what the maintainer says, NMU's are okay.
Is any of this Debian's business? If so, which parts? What is the role of the DPL in such a situation?
If hypothetical you and hypothetical Andrew can't work together, you need to be separated; if hypothetical you or hypothetical someone else is abusing a maintainer for their work on their package, that's inappropriate, and should be recognised as such by everyone. In most cases, I think people like hypothetical Andrew can deal with idiotic flames such as hypothetical you hypothetically will have made, given public support. Ideally, I think your whole scenario should stop at that point.
The real issue is finding a way of improving Debian that doesn't involve suggesting that people are being incompetent, immoral or lazy, and removing the incentive for hypothetical you to have started this whole hypothetical thing.
Hypothetically yours, aj
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
