Quoting Gunnar Wolf (2024-06-15 07:44:04) > It seems Sean's GR (pre-)proposal perfectly fits the bill for most > paradigmatic Debian discussions. From (half-)following the discussion, > (must confess I have >80 pending messages I haven't read, so there > might be some reality check I haven't yet applied), I can say that: > > 1. Nobody really opposes what is being proposed. > > (which makes sense, as tag2upload is barely controversial: What is > being requested is for the project to ask ftp-masters to trust an > automatically-signing key as a valid originator for source > packages. Of course, this key is to be controlled by an auditable > source base, controlled 100% by members of our project) > > (Important mentioning: Nobody is to be forced to use > tag2upload... at least not for the forseeable future) > > 2. Many people interpret that _others_ oppose this proposal because it > opens the door for endangering different workflows or pieces of > infrastructure. > > (But everybody so far says "I'm not saying I want to kill $thing!" > or "It is not me who opposes the idea!") > > 3. While a listmaster has already called for civility, at least once, > this thread "beautifully" shows how we are capable of treating each > other without much civility, but "decorating" our speech in a way > not to make it obvious we belittle and attack others. > > And I think (no evidence!) most of the bad interactions in this > thread come from prior frictions. There is a lot of > finger-pointing, but all people pointed at answer by claiming to be > innocent of the nefarious accusations... > > 4. I understand Sean (and Ian, I pressume) are pushing this GR to > solve a stalemate while negotiating with ftp-masters regarding > implementation details, or something like that. In such case, I > would have expected an ftp-master to explain what is so difficult > in accepting the new proposed tool/workflow. > > In other words: Is there and underlying controversy? Or is it just > we enjoy poking each other? > > In any case... I understand you want to give some "discussion time" > before pushing the process. But, is there something in particular > you are waiting from this discussion? > > This is one of the mails that actually point nowhere, and I fear are > not as constructive... I sat a bit with it half-written, pondering > whether to send it or to delete it. I am deciding to send it because > the interaction patterns we are seeing are quite pathological. I'm > sending this mail as a call, not only not to tell the other party to > fsck off some filesystems, but to stop finger-pointing and > second-guessing.
I find your post very helpful, and appreciate your posting it. For example, I recognize my own finger being too pointy - i.e. that I clearly was not clearly on topic, but derailed the conversation somewhat, through my personal, too stubborn views. Thanks a lot for your sprinkling the atmosphere of this mailinglist "room" with a bit of caring-mindset-fairydust. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ * Sponsorship: https://ko-fi.com/drjones [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
