On Wednesday 03 August 2005 19:02, Gustavo Franco wrote: > On 8/3/05, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wednesday 03 August 2005 18:15, Steve Greenland wrote: > > > Thanks for the pointer, Adam, and a giant "Feh!" to the genius who > > > came up with that idea. > > > > Did you even think of asking for the rationale behind the name > > change? > > > > Hint: check the archives of the kernel mailing list. > > lkml or debian kernel ML ?
debian-kernel > Are you asking to our users - yes, some of > them use sid to help us with bug tracking and not because it's cool - > read lkml ? I knew about the name change but i didn't read it there > and i don't think that ask debian users and developers to keep their > eye in lkml or any debian kernel mailing lists makes sense. Agree. > We've this > list and debian-devel-announce. AFAIK, it's a important package and > not a transparent transition. I agree that an announcement on d-d-a would have been nice. > Closing, it isn't a bash against the kernel team. It isn't my point, > my problem is with this "didn't you know, read X stupid!" approach. > Just reply or let anyone else help the developer or user asking us. > Didn't he asked the rationale behind it? Just inform on this list and > will you sound way better. That was not my point. I can understand people not knowing about the change and being surprised by it. My reaction was solely against the remark that can be read as "... and the person who came up with the idea of changing the package name should be shot ..." without even asking _why_ the name was changed. It is not the kind of change that is in general made lightly and it's downright rude to assume it was without investigating first. Cheers, FJP
pgpDnv16DMulm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
