Gunnar Wolf
2024-06-15 05:50:02 UTC
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.
- Gunnar.
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.
- Gunnar.