Drew Parsons | 29 Nov 03:13 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 21:05 +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...Due to unfortunate [1]circumstances the weekly
> newsletter stopped being released weekly
> 
>  1. http://www.dunc-tank.org/

Give it a rest alright, won't you?  Geez...

Drew

MJ Ray | 29 Nov 11:14 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Drew Parsons <dparsons <at> debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 21:05 +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > ...Due to unfortunate [1]circumstances the weekly
> > newsletter stopped being released weekly
> > 
> >  1. http://www.dunc-tank.org/
>
> Give it a rest alright, won't you?  Geez...

Give it a rest yourself.  It is fairly important for the introduction
of Debian Weekly News to explain why it is no longer Weekly.

Regards,
--

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Baz | 29 Nov 20:54 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Perhaps you prefer to see Debian releases late than to see the Weekly News published every week plus a day or two? 

On 11/29/06, MJ Ray <mjr <at> phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Drew Parsons <dparsons <at> debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 21:05 +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > ...Due to unfortunate [1]circumstances the weekly
> > newsletter stopped being released weekly
> >
> >  1. http://www.dunc-tank.org/
>
> Give it a rest alright, won't you?  Geez...

Give it a rest yourself.  It is fairly important for the introduction
of Debian Weekly News to explain why it is no longer Weekly.

Regards,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-REQUEST <at> lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster <at> lists.debian.org




--
"...heart and soul....one will burn."
- Joy Division
Martin Wuertele | 29 Nov 22:06 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

* Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> [2006-11-29 20:55]:

> Perhaps you prefer to see Debian releases late than to see the Weekly News
> published every week plus a day or two?

Now that is quite an unsubstantiated imputation.

Martin
--

-- 
http://martin.wuertele.net/ -- Debian -- OFTC -- SPI -- maxx <at> debian.org
<youam> ich kann gar nicht so viel tun, wie ich nicht lassen kann

Baz | 29 Nov 22:45 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

It was a question, not an imputation, unsubstantiated or otherwise...

On 11/29/06, Martin Wuertele <maxx <at> debian.org> wrote:
* Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> [2006-11-29 20:55]:

> Perhaps you prefer to see Debian releases late than to see the Weekly News
> published every week plus a day or two?

Now that is quite an unsubstantiated imputation.

Martin
--
http://martin.wuertele.net/ -- Debian -- OFTC -- SPI -- maxx <at> debian.org
<youam> ich kann gar nicht so viel tun, wie ich nicht lassen kann


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-REQUEST <at> lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster <at> lists.debian.org




--
"...heart and soul....one will burn."
- Joy Division
MJ Ray | 30 Nov 10:55 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps you prefer to see Debian releases late than to see the Weekly News
> published every week plus a day or two?

I like to see debian release when it is ready and I don't care when
the Weekly News appears.

Perhaps you prefer to sell Debian leadership for money, any money,
rather than to build consensus among Debian developers on how to
support it equitably?

Regards,
--

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Baz | 1 Dec 07:16 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

 

I prefer to see "etch" released in a timely manner - I prefer to see the DWN released weekly in the same excellent degree.  An organization such as The Debian Project can certainly do both.    Anthony Towns et al, have come up with something (anything) to try and solve a major problem.  Do I acknowledge that money may have a corrupting influence?  Yes I do.  Do I believe it has corrupted the process in question?

 
The question is - what can be done to reconcile the conflicting concerns?

On 11/30/06, MJ Ray < mjr <at> phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Baz < bazciscor <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps you prefer to see Debian releases late than to see the Weekly News
> published every week plus a day or two?

I like to see debian release when it is ready and I don't care when
the Weekly News appears.

Perhaps you prefer to sell Debian leadership for money, any money,
rather than to build consensus among Debian developers on how to
support it equitably?

Regards,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-REQUEST <at> lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster <at> lists.debian.org




--
"...heart and soul....one will burn."
- Joy Division
Russ Allbery | 1 Dec 22:00 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I prefer to see "etch" released in a timely manner - I prefer to see the
> DWN released weekly in the same excellent degree.  An organization such
> as The Debian Project can certainly do both.  Anthony Towns et al, have
> come up with something (anything) to try and solve a major problem.  Do
> I acknowledge that money may have a corrupting influence?  Yes I do.  Do
> I believe it has corrupted the process in question?

> The question is - what can be done to reconcile the conflicting
> concerns?

The best thing that can be done to reconcile the conflicting concerns
right now, as far as I'm concerned, would be for all of us to stop telling
other people what to do.  That applies across the board: stop telling
other people how to spend their money, stop telling other people how to
structure their time, stop involving ourselves in the personal decisions
of other developers unless invited to do so, stop looking behind every
action for a whiff of conspiracy, stop psychoanalyzing each other, stop
criticizing each other for our emotions, stop reacting when other people
do.

Just stop.

Let everyone work on Debian in their own fashion, in their own way, and
take their contributions at face value and move on.  Some people will stop
working for whatever reason, including anger at what other people have
chosen to do with their money or how other people have chosen to accept
money.  Some people will increase their effort.  All of us are *very*
different, are coming from extremely different cultures and sets of
concerns, and have very different personal arrangements of work/life
balance, employment, funding, and work structure.  We need to give each
other space to be ourselves while working on Debian and not try to force
Debian Developers into any particular model.  There are too many of us for
that.

This doesn't solve all of the problems, and I'm not saying that the
concerns raised can be dismissed as simply as just letting them go, but it
would give us a cooling off period and some space to focus on the work
rather than on the politics, and I for one would really appreciate that
right now.

--

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra <at> debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Bill Allombert | 5 Dec 22:08 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 01:00:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > I prefer to see "etch" released in a timely manner - I prefer to see the
> > DWN released weekly in the same excellent degree.  An organization such
> > as The Debian Project can certainly do both.  Anthony Towns et al, have
> > come up with something (anything) to try and solve a major problem.  Do
> > I acknowledge that money may have a corrupting influence?  Yes I do.  Do
> > I believe it has corrupted the process in question?
> 
> > The question is - what can be done to reconcile the conflicting
> > concerns?
> 
> The best thing that can be done to reconcile the conflicting concerns
> right now, as far as I'm concerned, would be for all of us to stop telling
> other people what to do.  

This would start by rescinding the Vancouver proposal, and generally
not conflating executive and legislative power.

Cheers,
--

-- 
Bill. <ballombe <at> debian.org>

Imagine a small pink swirl here.

Steve McIntyre | 6 Dec 01:12 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:08:54PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
>On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 01:00:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> 
>> The best thing that can be done to reconcile the conflicting concerns
>> right now, as far as I'm concerned, would be for all of us to stop telling
>> other people what to do.  
>
>This would start by rescinding the Vancouver proposal, and generally
>not conflating executive and legislative power.

What on earth are you babbling about?

--

-- 
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve <at> einval.com
"I can't ever sleep on planes ... call it irrational if you like, but I'm
 afraid I'll miss my stop" -- Vivek Dasmohapatra

Stephen Gran | 6 Dec 01:21 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

This one time, at band camp, Steve McIntyre said:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:08:54PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
> >On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 01:00:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> 
> >> The best thing that can be done to reconcile the conflicting
> >> concerns right now, as far as I'm concerned, would be for all of us
> >> to stop telling other people what to do.  
> >
> >This would start by rescinding the Vancouver proposal, and generally
> >not conflating executive and legislative power.
> 
> What on earth are you babbling about?

Bill's apparently under the impression that Debian has either a
legislative or an executive branch that exists and wields some power,
and this idea has apparently made him grumpy.  It's good for all of us
that this idea doesn't actually exist.

Take care,
--

-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran <at> debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
MJ Ray | 6 Dec 10:26 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Stephen Gran <sgran <at> debian.org> wrote:
> Bill's apparently under the impression that Debian has either a
> legislative or an executive branch that exists and wields some power,
> and this idea has apparently made him grumpy.  It's good for all of us
> that this idea doesn't actually exist.

In a way, it does, whether or not you agree with it: DPL+most
delegates are the executive, DDs are the legislative, secretary+some
cttes are the authority, but that is a view not agreed by all and I've
seen it debated on-list since at least 2002.  Another way of viewing
debian's governance is a democracy / guild / do-ocracy split (which I
think appears in Biella Coleman's dissertation).

It seems unhelpful to simply deny those views, as it's usually pretty
clear what is meant.  In the other world-view above, Bill Allombert
seems unhappy with the guild deciding things previously done byq the
democracy.  Has that got better or worse since Vancouver?  Did
Vancouver mark a structural change?  I've not seen many good studies
and surveys of debian recently, after a gaggle around 2004, some of
which are linked from http://people.debian.org/~mjr/surveys.html

Anyone feel like answering the point instead of abusing the viewer?

Hope that explains,
--

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Stephen Gran | 6 Dec 17:46 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

This one time, at band camp, MJ Ray said:
> Stephen Gran <sgran <at> debian.org> wrote:
> > Bill's apparently under the impression that Debian has either a
> > legislative or an executive branch that exists and wields some
> > power, and this idea has apparently made him grumpy.  It's good for
> > all of us that this idea doesn't actually exist.
> 
> In a way, it does, whether or not you agree with it: DPL+most
> delegates are the executive

This would certainly be true if the DPL had the power to veto decisions
made by developers, or issue fiats, or any other traditional hallmark of
power.  Since the DPL doesn't have any of those powers, that assertion
doesn't make any sense to me.  It has been jokingly said that the DPL
could be replaced with a mailbot that just replies "That sounds like a
good idea.  Why don't you try it?"

> DDs are the legislative

That doesn't make sense, either.  The legislature is a subset of the
population, elected to act on behalf of the population.  DDs are the
population.

> secretary+some cttes are the authority

I'm not sure what the 'authority' maps to in a traditional government,
so I'm not sure what this means either.

> but that is a view not agreed by all and I've seen it debated on-list
> since at least 2002.  Another way of viewing debian's governance is a
> democracy / guild / do-ocracy split (which I think appears in Biella
> Coleman's dissertation).

This sort of interpretation seems more reasonable to me.

> It seems unhelpful to simply deny those views, as it's usually pretty
> clear what is meant.  In the other world-view above, Bill Allombert
> seems unhappy with the guild deciding things previously done byq the
> democracy.  Has that got better or worse since Vancouver?  Did
> Vancouver mark a structural change?

Any decision by any 'guild' or 'executive' or whatever you want to call
it can be overruled by GR.  I take the fact that no GR has passed as a
sign that people are not that upset about it.

> Anyone feel like answering the point instead of abusing the viewer?

Nice touch.  Constructing a sentence that simultaneously dismisses the
person you disagree with while crying foul that they're being dismissive
is a nice rhetorical flourish.  I'm sure it was helpful.
--

-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran <at> debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hubert Chan | 6 Dec 22:27 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 16:46:37 +0000, Stephen Gran <sgran <at> debian.org> said:

> It has been jokingly said that the DPL could be replaced with a
> mailbot that just replies "That sounds like a good idea.  Why don't
> you try it?"

That sounds like a good idea.  Why don't you try it?

;)

Bill Allombert | 8 Dec 21:20 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 12:21:59AM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Steve McIntyre said:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 09:08:54PM +0000, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > >On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 01:00:46PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > >> 
> > >> The best thing that can be done to reconcile the conflicting
> > >> concerns right now, as far as I'm concerned, would be for all of us
> > >> to stop telling other people what to do.  
> > >
> > >This would start by rescinding the Vancouver proposal, and generally
> > >not conflating executive and legislative power.
> > 
> > What on earth are you babbling about?
>  
> Bill's apparently under the impression that Debian has either a
> legislative or an executive branch that exists and wields some power,
> and this idea has apparently made him grumpy.  It's good for all of us
> that this idea doesn't actually exist.

I wrote power, not people.  In every society, power belong to three
kind: executive, legislative and judicial. Debian is no exception.
There is no much point using Condorcet vote system if we are going to
ignore Montesquieu.

Executive power is the power to do stuff, legislative power is the power
to write rules how stuff are done and judicial power the power to force
rules to be followed. 

For example developers have executive power over their packages, but the
Debian Policy group has legislative power to set up policies that
packages should follow and the technical commity has judicial power to
ensure the policy are followed.

If we follow the Debian constitution (section 2):

The executive power is split belong:
1. The Project Leader;
2. Delegates appointed by the Project Leader for specific tasks;
3. The individual Developer working on a particular task,
(like maintaining a package)

The legislative power is held by:
1. The Developers, by way of General Resolution 
2. The Developers, by way of Debian policy update process.
 (6.1(1), 6.3(5), Policy Process 3.)

The judicial power is held by:
1. The Project Secretary.
 (7.1(3) Adjudicates any disputes about interpretation of the
constitution. )
2. The Technical Committee;
 (6.1(4) Overrule a Developer (requires a 3:1 majority).

Cheers,
--

-- 
Bill. <ballombe <at> debian.org>

Imagine a large blue swirl here. 
Ian Jackson | 11 Dec 12:33 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Bill Allombert writes ("Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006"):
> For example developers have executive power over their packages, but the
> Debian Policy group has legislative power to set up policies that
> packages should follow and the technical commity has judicial power to
> ensure the policy are followed.

This is a completely wrong understanding.  In your example, the TC is
able to determine the content of policy as well as to ask for
particular fixes to packages, and if the TC thinks that policy is
wrong or inapplicable or whatever it will decide what it thinks is
best.

Debian does not have the separation of powers you describe.

Ian.

Hans-Georg Bork | 30 Nov 00:02 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 10:14 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> [...] It is fairly important for the introduction
> of Debian Weekly News to explain why it is no longer Weekly.

To get that, just check out the link under [2] in the latest issue of
DWN (released Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:05:03 +0100 (CET))

Regards
	-- hgb

MJ Ray | 30 Nov 10:50 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Hans-Georg Bork <hgb <at> hgbhome.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 10:14 +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > [...] It is fairly important for the introduction
> > of Debian Weekly News to explain why it is no longer Weekly.
>
> To get that, just check out the link under [2] in the latest issue of
> DWN (released Tue, 28 Nov 2006 21:05:03 +0100 (CET))

I'm not sure which was [2] in the version you read, but that sounds
like firing up a web browser and visiting another site, rather than a
short explanation *in* the introduction.  Joey funded a lot of DWN
work, so has quite some control, and few complained about it until he
was demotivated by money.  So, each edition's leader includes passing
mentions of why the Weekly isn't weekly any more.

As news reporting, it would be fair for DWN to point out all negative
effects of dunc-tank - which are going to last long after the end of
their funding - and I think Joey has been quite restrained, given his
strong views on it.  Personally, I'd like to see DWN point out more
things that have fallen off due to Dunc-Tank, ready for the
evaluation.  Dunc-tank's supporters have steadfastly refused to tell
how they think we can measure whether or not the so-called experiment
has been successful.  I expect much hand-waving in the coming months
and I hope that the debian media will help scrutinise the DPL on this.

Do people have a problem with how funding can be used to control the
project from half-outside the community at the minute? If so, take it
up with debian-release and dunc-tank...

Regards,
--

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Dan Jacobson | 30 Nov 20:53 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Please don't CC to debian-news <at> lists.debian.org, as we
gmane.linux.debian.user.news readers expect only the newsletter, not
the discussions. Never knew it wasn't moderated until today.

Filipus Klutiero | 6 Dec 21:11 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

MJ Ray:
> Drew Parsons <dparsons <at> debian.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 21:05 +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > ...Due to unfortunate [1]circumstances the weekly
> > > newsletter stopped being released weekly
> > >
> > >  1. http://www.dunc-tank.org/
> >
> > Give it a rest alright, won't you?  Geez...
>
> Give it a rest yourself.  It is fairly important for the introduction
> of Debian Weekly News to explain why it is no longer Weekly.

If DWN stops being published regularly, that must be due to unfortunate 
circumstances, so stating that is useless. If it had been stated instead, for 
example, that due to the low contribution to Martin Schulze's Amazon 
wishlist, he had decided to reduce his involvement, I think Drew Parsons 
wouldn't have complained.

Drew Parsons must also have been commenting the point of view which joey sends 
by implying that dunc-tank is unfortunate, as DWN should be NPOV. If you 
don't like that people are paid to work on Debian, you can help Debian 
anyway...but it's still best to stay neutral in what should be so.

Drew Parsons | 7 Dec 13:48 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Filipus wrote:
> Drew Parsons must also have been commenting the point of view which joey sends 
> by implying that dunc-tank is unfortunate, as DWN should be NPOV. If you 
> don't like that people are paid to work on Debian, you can help Debian 
> anyway...but it's still best to stay neutral in what should be so.

That's partly what I had in mind, but even more so I was commenting on
the fact that Martin has said the same thing in previous issues of DWN.
I respect his expressing his point of view in DWN in the first
instance, but having stated it already it's not clear to me how helpful
it is to keep harping on it over again issue after issue.  It's not
news anymore.  

If he really feels it's important to mention it, then the place with
the call for assistance, "We still need more volunteer writers", would
be a more appropriate place for it.

Drew

Ian Jackson | 11 Dec 12:35 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Filipus Klutiero writes ("Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006"):
>  DWN should be NPOV

What nonsense.  Debian is a political organisation, and all of us are
engaged in politics as well as technology.  Expecting us to be neutral
is to miss the point completely.

Ian.

Martin Schulze | 11 Dec 14:23 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Ian Jackson wrote:
> Filipus Klutiero writes ("Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006"):
> >  DWN should be NPOV
> 
> What nonsense.  Debian is a political organisation, and all of us are
> engaged in politics as well as technology.  Expecting us to be neutral
> is to miss the point completely.

I have to admit that I agree to Filipus, DWN should try to be as
neutral as it can.  However, this requires an Editor that actively
adds items and maintains neutrality, while at the moment (dunc-tank,
yada yada, no funding etc.) DWN is solely contributor-based, so the
contributors decide what gets included.

Filipus, you're welcome to contribute.  Send your items to dwn <at> debian.org

Regards,

	Joey

--

-- 
Life is too short to run proprietary software.  -- Bdale Garbee

Baz | 19 Dec 01:52 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006



On 12/11/06, Martin Schulze <joey <at> infodrom.org> wrote:
Ian Jackson wrote:
> Filipus Klutiero writes ("Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006"):
> >  DWN should be NPOV
>
> What nonsense.  Debian is a political organisation, and all of us are
> engaged in politics as well as technology.  Expecting us to be neutral
> is to miss the point completely.

I have to admit that I agree to Filipus, DWN should try to be as
neutral as it can.  However, this requires an Editor that actively
adds items and maintains neutrality, while at the moment (dunc-tank,
yada yada, no funding etc.) DWN is solely contributor-based, so the
contributors decide what gets included.

Filipus, you're welcome to contribute.  Send your items to dwn <at> debian.org

Regards,

       Joey

--
Life is too short to run proprietary software.  -- Bdale Garbee


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-REQUEST <at> lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster <at> lists.debian.org


Hello -
 
I read the following in the current DistroWatch Weekly:
 
"Andreas Barth has published a release update regarding the upcoming release of Debian GNU/Linux 4.0. Although it does not provide any information about the probable release date of the much awaited Etch, it does hint at what many suspected was one of the reasons for the current delay - the go slow strike of some of those Debian developers who strongly objected to the Dunc-Tank experiment to fund the work of two release managers with generous salaries..."
 
Is this correct - that some Debian developers are consciously and deliberately slowing the release of "etch?"
 
- Sebastian
 

 



--
"...heart and soul....one will burn."
- Joy Division
Mario Lang | 19 Dec 02:01 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> writes:

> On 12/11/06, Martin Schulze <joey <at> infodrom.org> wrote:
>>
>> Ian Jackson wrote:
>> > Filipus Klutiero writes ("Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th,
>> 2006"):
>> > >  DWN should be NPOV
>> >
>> > What nonsense.  Debian is a political organisation, and all of us are
>> > engaged in politics as well as technology.  Expecting us to be neutral
>> > is to miss the point completely.
>>
>> I have to admit that I agree to Filipus, DWN should try to be as
>> neutral as it can.  However, this requires an Editor that actively
>> adds items and maintains neutrality, while at the moment (dunc-tank,
>> yada yada, no funding etc.) DWN is solely contributor-based, so the
>> contributors decide what gets included.
>>
>> Filipus, you're welcome to contribute.  Send your items to dwn <at> debian.org
> Hello -
>
> I read the following in the current DistroWatch Weekly:
>
> "Andreas Barth has published a release update regarding the upcoming release
> of Debian <http://distrowatch.com/debian> GNU/Linux 4.0. Although it does
> not provide any information about the probable release date of the much
> awaited Etch, it does hint at what many suspected was one of the reasons for
> the current delay - the go slow strike of some of those Debian developers
> who strongly objected to the Dunc-Tank experiment to fund the work of two
> release managers with generous salaries..."
>
> Is this correct - that some Debian developers are consciously and
> deliberately slowing the release of "etch?"

I don't believe this.  Sounds like a deliberate attempt to write a "story".
It is true that Dunc-Tank is a controversial issue, but I dont believe
any debian developer would deliberately try to slow the release down.

--

-- 
CYa,
  Mario | Debian Developer <URL:http://debian.org/>
  .''`. | Get my public key via finger mlang <at> db.debian.org
 : :' : | 1024D/7FC1A0854909BCCDBE6C102DDFFC022A6B113E44
 `. `'
   `-      <URL:http://delysid.org/>  <URL:http://www.staff.tugraz.at/mlang/>

Russ Allbery | 19 Dec 02:36 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Baz <bazciscor <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I read the following in the current DistroWatch Weekly:

> "Andreas Barth has published a release update regarding the upcoming
> release of Debian <http://distrowatch.com/debian> GNU/Linux
> 4.0. Although it does not provide any information about the probable
> release date of the much awaited Etch, it does hint at what many
> suspected was one of the reasons for the current delay - the go slow
> strike of some of those Debian developers who strongly objected to the
> Dunc-Tank experiment to fund the work of two release managers with
> generous salaries..."

> Is this correct - that some Debian developers are consciously and
> deliberately slowing the release of "etch?"

I suppose it's possible this is how they were reading the "Dunc-Bank" QA
effort to find RC bugs, but if so, I think they were misreading the spirit
of that effort (which was helpful to Debian regardless of which side of
the dunc-tank question you come down on).  Besides, that definitely was
not a slowdown; it was a *speed-up* of work that Debian benefits from in
the long run.

--

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra <at> debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Marc Haber | 19 Dec 10:30 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I suppose it's possible this is how they were reading the "Dunc-Bank" QA
> effort to find RC bugs, but if so, I think they were misreading the spirit
> of that effort

I think that the first two sentences on http://dunc-bank.zoy.org/ have
any potential of being mis-read. Dunc-Bank looks like a desperate
effort to make the current dunc-tank experiment fail masquerading
behind a generally good idea. Thankfully, the web page makes it pretty
clear what dunc-bank's real objective is.

Greetings
Marc

--

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835

Marc Haber | 19 Dec 11:37 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:30:57AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> I 

do not

> think that the first two sentences on http://dunc-bank.zoy.org/ have
> any potential of being mis-read.

Greetings
Marc

--

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835

Russ Allbery | 19 Dec 20:20 2006
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Marc Haber <mh+debian-project <at> zugschlus.de> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> I suppose it's possible this is how they were reading the "Dunc-Bank"
>> QA effort to find RC bugs, but if so, I think they were misreading the
>> spirit of that effort

> I think that the first two sentences on http://dunc-bank.zoy.org/ have
> any potential of being mis-read. Dunc-Bank looks like a desperate effort
> to make the current dunc-tank experiment fail masquerading behind a
> generally good idea. Thankfully, the web page makes it pretty clear what
> dunc-bank's real objective is.

I read it as humor, but possibly that's helped by seeing it when it was
originally proposed and seeing people take it in a fairly light-hearted
fashion.  Plus, I really do appreciate the work that they're doing.
They're not making up RC bugs; they're finding real problems that really
do need to be fixed.

--

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra <at> debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Kevin Mark | 20 Dec 04:10 2006
Picon
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 11:20:52AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Marc Haber <mh+debian-project <at> zugschlus.de> writes:
> > On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> 
> >> I suppose it's possible this is how they were reading the "Dunc-Bank"
> >> QA effort to find RC bugs, but if so, I think they were misreading the
> >> spirit of that effort
> 
> > I think that the first two sentences on http://dunc-bank.zoy.org/ have
> > any potential of being mis-read. Dunc-Bank looks like a desperate effort
> > to make the current dunc-tank experiment fail masquerading behind a
> > generally good idea. Thankfully, the web page makes it pretty clear what
> > dunc-bank's real objective is.
> 
> I read it as humor, but possibly that's helped by seeing it when it was
> originally proposed and seeing people take it in a fairly light-hearted
> fashion. 
As it was reported by some survey this year, internet communication does
not usually convey the emotional content of the message even if it
includes smileys. The report said that about 1/2 the time both the
sender and receiver were in agrement as to how a message was intended
to be read. This just confirms it for me. In the internet age, why are
reporter still unwilling to simply email to originator and ask? Its not
like we have body guards or secretaries to get past or you need to pay
to send a message :-)
-Kev
--

-- 
|  .''`.  == Debian GNU/Linux == |       my web site:       |
| : :' :      The  Universal     | debian.home.pipeline.com |
| `. `'      Operating System    | go to counter.li.org and |
|   `-    http://www.debian.org/ |    be counted! #238656   |
|     my keysever: pgp.mit.edu   |     my NPO: cfsg.org     |
Pierre Habouzit | 19 Dec 21:03 2006
X-Face
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:30:57AM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 05:36:23PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I suppose it's possible this is how they were reading the "Dunc-Bank" QA
> > effort to find RC bugs, but if so, I think they were misreading the spirit
> > of that effort
> 
> I think that the first two sentences on http://dunc-bank.zoy.org/ have
> any potential of being mis-read. Dunc-Bank looks like a desperate
> effort to make the current dunc-tank experiment fail masquerading
> behind a generally good idea. Thankfully, the web page makes it pretty
> clear what dunc-bank's real objective is.

  You're definitely of the humorless kind. I do think that
http://dunc-bank.zoy.org has no potential to be misunderstood to the
point where it can be taken for anything else than satire and irony[0].
There is nothing like a "Dunk-Bank" initiative, merely people that do
care about QA a lot, and did not want to see etch being released with a
diminished quality or in a hurry.

  [0] Or maybe your browser totally lack image support. I can point to
      you many very lightweight browsers that can do that, you can mail
      me privately if you need some pointers.
--

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder <at> debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org
MJ Ray | 19 Dec 21:36 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

Pierre Habouzit <madcoder <at> debian.org> wrote:
>   [0] Or maybe your browser totally lack image support. I can point to
>       you many very lightweight browsers that can do that, you can mail
>       me privately if you need some pointers. [...]

Please do not rely on image support, and please do not promote 'just
use $BROWSER instead' as a solution if you do so.

  "1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element [...]
  This includes: images [...]"

-- the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/

Best wishes,
--

-- 
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Wesley J. Landaker | 20 Dec 17:33 2006
X-Face
Picon

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

On Tuesday 19 December 2006 13:36, MJ Ray wrote:
> Please do not rely on image support, and please do not promote 'just
> use $BROWSER instead' as a solution if you do so.
>
>   "1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element [...]
>   This includes: images [...]"
>
> -- the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/

Of course, the site in question actually does provide alt tags for every 
image...

--

-- 
Wesley J. Landaker <wjl <at> icecavern.net> <xmpp:wjl <at> icecavern.net>
OpenPGP FP: 4135 2A3B 4726 ACC5 9094  0097 F0A9 8A4C 4CD6 E3D2
Andreas Barth | 19 Dec 08:47 2006

Re: Debian Weekly News - November 28th, 2006

* Baz (bazciscor <at> gmail.com) [061219 01:52]:
> "Andreas Barth has published a release update regarding the upcoming release
> of Debian <http://distrowatch.com/debian> GNU/Linux 4.0. Although it does
> not provide any information about the probable release date of the much
> awaited Etch, it does hint at what many suspected was one of the reasons for
> the current delay - the go slow strike of some of those Debian developers
> who strongly objected to the Dunc-Tank experiment to fund the work of two
> release managers with generous salaries..."
> 
> Is this correct - that some Debian developers are consciously and
> deliberately slowing the release of "etch?"

What is true is that I didn't say that, didn't intend to, and it was
also not an release update. Journalismn at its best.

Cheers,
Andi
--

-- 
  http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/


Gmane