On 2004-01-05 15:34:37 +0000 Raul Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...] How is it fair to expect list readers to know what
you've done for your employer?
I think my experience of BTSes and archives is similar to many DDs, so
hardly worth stating.
I didn't see anything in Anthony's message to make me believe that he
knew about your employment history.
Nor do I, but I didn't claim that he did. You seem to argue against
something that wasn't written. I only claimed that he already knew I
hadn't run the debian infrastructure. Please stop playing word games.
It annoys me and I hope most subscribers spot it.
I think a summarization of the relevant points would not be
off topic.
They are being actively discussed elsewhere, so dividing the
discussions would be a nuisance. I hope that the OP will summarise
substantial points in good time.
. Are the people using the Debian infrastructure to support
. non-free helping to prevent the problems from being
. solved? Already, someone has mentioned some Java packages
. that I think could be in Debian but aren't. Is that because
. contrib is an easy enough home for them? If so, then removing
. non-free and contrib from our infrastructure would probably
. encourage them into Debian, solving one problem.
Here, you've implied that the presence of non-free hinders the
progress
of debian.
That looks more like a question whether things which could go into
main end up in contrib if it's less work. If I ask a question, do you
think that I imply something? Did that question imply that you are
jumping to conclusions?
But if you want to restate your reasons for getting rid of non-free,
that's fine with me: you're the expert on that.
You are the one expertly playing word games, with your claims of
hidden meanings.
Those are the measurements you're asking about, correct?
No, I do not know which measurements are most interesting and I did
not request any specific ones from him. That should be obvious to the
most casual observer. I am surprised that he chose to invent numbers.
There is the n-m process. I think that DDs have to know something
to get through it, as well as spend the time sitting through it.
But drive (motivation and persisntence) has a lot more to do with it
than knowledge.
Do you think that n-m is too easy and allows through people who do
not agree
with the philosophy, procedures, tasks and skills?
I think that "drive and motivation" vs. "knowledge" is nearly
orthogonal
to issues of philosophy, procedures, tasks and skills.
Let's break this up, as I'm confused by your non-answer: Do you think
that n-m allows through people with drive, but insufficient knowledge?
Do you think that philosophy, procedures, tasks and skills are not
knowledge?
I think that approximating "hours spent" with "bytes uploaded to
archive"
is about the closest one could ever get -- and even that is a gross
approximation.
It seems pretty flawed, for sure, as the upstream sizes need to be
considered. Is decompressed uploaded diff.gz traffic a better rough
number? Probably those running the infrastructure can think of better
estimates and suggest other interesting things.
No. I say let the "bazaar" decide.
You mean, instead of voting on it?
No.
Then that's an unfair statement -- because you're advocating replacing
"letting the bazaar decide" with "let's vote on it."
I think I am advocating replacing debian support for this with support
outside debian by people who are interested in it. It looks like most
debian developers don't package non-free software. Given your reason
is wrong (those quotes are not replacements for each other), do you
still think it unfair?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
