On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 10:18:12AM -0400, Jonathan Kamens wrote: > > I also think that certain things he has said here, and how he has said > them (for example, in his first message, "Can people who are offended by > the existence of systemd request to drop it from debian?"), imply that he > does not take seriously people's concerns about the contents of the > fortune-*-off packages. This lack of regard for other people's carefully > considered opinions seems to be out of alignment with both the "Be > respectful" and "Be collaborative" CoC rules. > [SNIP] > > Salvo's conduct during this discussion has made it difficult to engage in > a productive way with the substance of what actually needs to be decided.
Let me see if I can help. The question "Can people who are offended by the existence of systemd request to drop it from debian?" can be restated more generally as "Can people who are offended by the existence of [arbitrary sequence of bytes] request to drop it from debian?" That right there is the very essence of what needs to be decided. So, as a project, we first need to answer that question. And if the answer is "yes", then we need to establish what latitude the maintainer has in dealing with such a request, as well as what authorities other stakeholders have in relation to supporting or overriding the maintainer, and also criteria* by which the maintainer and other stakeholders are meant to evaluate the situation. Salvo has requested something along these lines, but limited in scope to the particular packages at issue today. It would benefit us as a project to decide these issues more generally, so as to limit the likelihood that discussions like this will be repeated (as Russ pointed out that they are with some regularity). Regards, -Roberto * This would include things like "who is allowed to be offended?" "what are they allowed to consider offensive?" "who is allowed to judge whether a claimed offense is genuine?" etc. -- Roberto C. Sánchez
