On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 at 16:57, Christoph Berg <m...@debian.org> wrote: > > Re: Luca Boccassi > > > BEGIN BALLOT > > > > > > The Technical Committee declines to overrule the maintainer of > > > base-files, or issue any advice on issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > > > > > We do not think there is a clear proposal on the table for us to assess, > > > and we do not think it is appropriate to issue any general statements on > > > the issues concerning /etc/os-release. > > > > Seriously? In https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1077764#368 > > you say that you could rule on the general statement rather than a > > specific implementation, then I answer "I'd prefer that if it was > > possible", and this is how you respond? I've asked multiple times > > exactly what it is that you need in order to make a decision, and all > > I get in response are first cryptic and contradicting statements, and > > then this abrupt dismissal. This seriously feels like something out of > > Kafka novel. > > I vote A > N. > > Luca: people would be much more likely to act positively on your > requests if you wouldn't call them Kafkaesque.
I described the experience of this process as kafkaesque as a response to the dismissal, not before it, so unless it went through a mail relay in Winden that seems unlikely, among other things because of the principle of causality. And I think describing as kafkaesque the experience of being told "Yeah we can do X" ---> "You will now be punished for asking to do X" seems quite charitable to me as a description. Ironically, telling me the dismissal is because of this even though it happened before makes it feel even _more_ kafkaesque. I still haven't got the faintest clue what exactly is that you need in a proposal to consider it. I even thought about providing references and documentation for how other distributions with similar bodies provide a much more well defined engineering process for such proposals, so that even mere mortals like myself can actually understand it and use it productively, as a possible source of inspiration for constructive feedback, but what's the point? It's just going to go into /dev/null anyway. My takeway from this whole thing is that it's a waste of time to reach out to the TC, and it's best to just ignore it. Live and learn, I suppose.
