From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2758-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02F361381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 00:59:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 116F1E07FA;
Mon, 1 Jul 2013 00:59:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-gh0-f176.google.com (mail-gh0-f176.google.com [209.85.160.176])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C4E1E07F4
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 1 Jul 2013 00:59:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-gh0-f176.google.com with SMTP id z17so1803410ghb.35
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 30 Jun 2013 17:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
:user-agent;
bh=lTHzsSVLo2rFF3DlKRb86WYQu8AbKEnV4WYbY2pETFQ=;
b=CHQmHY2xsH2fKbjhw76tq9LmppO8gsRl6d6pJSPtFCfiZEtnqcafyVwcLCmuHAieVR
BQgA3Y+7QOvbQA9ysXhos31648NNKhUVqL0084RB+fBodJR6qV1l7H6Te7YKCecfXgcy
I8XX9gJZbgH4K58CjqfqKBuSsSxd5FtydJyjGFpyRzBbT9LNd5eYE9a3o/GHuflSK1P7
OGdp6cB5rQHvciXlFFfGg7ezOtPhehEA38gc4FYu3x2MICOHh56rfdHFjpJp6UxAJnV5
mbHstGeyer33JJ4MOk8iTyC5m9/rlCG/p/Hk9Ii2faTF+f32k9gSNQxokPe7msY7IoMS
MABw==
X-Received: by 10.236.28.226 with SMTP id g62mr11332304yha.10.1372640355384;
Sun, 30 Jun 2013 17:59:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s80sm29834381yhe.27.2013.06.30.17.59.12
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sun, 30 Jun 2013 17:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:59:11 -0500
Date: Sun, 30 Jun 2013 19:59:11 -0500
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Questions for Candidates (was:
Questioning/Interviewing council nominees)
Message-ID: <20130701005911.GA1936@linux1>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
References: <51BF597B.6060600@gentoo.org>
<51CF1759.10903@gentoo.org>
<51CF4529.7010307@gentoo.org>
<CAGfcS_=gGqYhL+s40s=tKw4py-TAqF5=Ww+3a4Kkt1UtF6nM+g@mail.gmail.com>
<51D011C1.2040606@gentoo.org>
<CAGfcS_=H_bDpPgs+710QjKBnNY5=FMRLJwryouHW3dhRnC=Cqw@mail.gmail.com>
<20130630185215.GA968@linux1>
<1372625765.17485.18.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="NzB8fVQJ5HfG6fxh"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1372625765.17485.18.camel@big_daddy.dol-sen.ca>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Archives-Salt: 91c581a6-a3ef-4f42-9c52-3431f8babbd4
X-Archives-Hash: c21328e9b2fa55579099c6db1599176e
--NzB8fVQJ5HfG6fxh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 01:56:05PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> Overall, I agree with both sides
>=20
> 1) What Ch=ED-Thanh said is true:
>=20
> Yes, cooperation is better. But the method how to achieve cooperation is
> convincing through arguments,...
>=20
> 2) What Rich said is also true:
>=20
> Maintaining a package is a privilege conditioned
> on using that power in alignment with our philosophies, not a right.
>=20
>=20
> The main problem here is finding the right balance between convincing
> (first choice) and mandating (if convincing fails). Unfortunately, like
> anywhere else in this world, not everyone will agree on where that
> balance point should be. There will always be extremists on both ends
> of the debate. It is the developers votes that will determine which end
> of the spectrum the balance point will be. It is also prudent for them
> to vote in someone that can see both ends of the spectrum ;)
Nothing is an absolute. I'm not saying that anyone who doesn't like
something a maintainer does should be able to force the maintainer to do
what they want.
Chithanh, please stop me and correct me if I am wrong.
The way I understand what you are saying is that you believe the
maintainers have absolute authority over what happens with their
packages. So if I file a bug against a package requesting a change that
I think would bring the package more in line with the gentoo philosophy for
example and explain to the maintainer why I think that is the case and
He closes my bug invalid or wontfix, you feel that I should not take my
concerns to qa or the council. correct?
What happens if I am actually a co-maintainer but another co-maintainer
blocks my changes?
imo there should be, and is, an arbitration path for this sort of thing.
William
--NzB8fVQJ5HfG6fxh
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlHQ1F8ACgkQblQW9DDEZTgMFgCfQjiZs6QHdcuUqEROpC81pMcZ
6YQAnRRXMwVHQfkLg6IEub9WygiwlWaZ
=uidg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--NzB8fVQJ5HfG6fxh--