Jonathan Dowland writes ("Re: conflicts between Debian's and upstream's Debian
package"):
> The "bad" packages Harald is talking about, I think, are external to
> Debian — I don't think he's trying to protect a DD here. So this is
> courtesy rather than hiding problems.
I don't think reference to the Social Contract is really helpful as an
argument (in other direction) on these kind of matters.
I think in most cases it would be perfectly possible to name the
upstream in question without "shaming" them.
Just because an upstream (or indeed anyone else) has done something
technical differently to the way we would have done it doesn't mean
that they are wrong. And even if they are wrong, we recognise that
(a) everyone makes mistakes (b) everyone has limited effort for doing
thins well.
The questions raised in this thread are mixed social and technical
ones. It is difficult to properly suggest how to improve matters
without knowing lots more about the context, including the technical
constraints and the factors behind the various people's
decisionmaking.
In other words I don't think that there is much that can be usefully
be said about the original abstract question, as posed.
If the OP would tell us what, specifically, we are talking about, it
might be possible to come up with useful answers and suggestions.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/21740.45200.824215.710...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
