A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
58 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Sergio Cipolla
Hello.
I'm just a Debian user for some years and I'm writing to this list
because I found that at
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814 the Debian
Multimedia maintainer Fabian Greffrath was very wrong, by being not
only wrong in what he said but also very impolite.
I wrote to a follow-up of that bug report (
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660924 ) about what I
thought of it:
"Fabian, who do you think you are to call d-m-o's packages as 'crappy'?
d-m-o is a traditional and very respected 3rd party repository for
Debian and has been for years.
I can't tell the same of you.
You know very well why it uses an epoch in their versioning: exactly
so as people that want/need to use the extra features/packages it
provides don't mix what shouldn't be mixed with the official Debian
packages.
I'm not sure if you're a Debian Maintainer or not (or worse, Debian
Developer) but this kind of big mouthing shouldn't be accepted from a
DM/DD.
If I find out the proper channel for this I'll raise this subject so
as the Debian contributors know that they should measure their words
otherwise they should step down (even a 'do-ocracy' has its limits)."
So I'm writing to this list to raise this subject that a DM/DD should
stand to a minimum level of respect, specially when talking about
fellow contributors (even unofficial).
Maybe this is already in some sort of code-of-conduct for someone
applying for DM but if it's not, I leave here my suggestion.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANLOsR7Sax1=aPT02wjq5=AftA0YfXcX3GX5bRVUcdVkXQxVtw@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Russ Allbery-2
Sergio Cipolla <[hidden email]> writes:

> I'm just a Debian user for some years and I'm writing to this list
> because I found that at
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814 the Debian
> Multimedia maintainer Fabian Greffrath was very wrong, by being not
> only wrong in what he said but also very impolite.
> I wrote to a follow-up of that bug report (
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660924 ) about what I
> thought of it:
> "Fabian, who do you think you are to call d-m-o's packages as 'crappy'?
> d-m-o is a traditional and very respected 3rd party repository for
> Debian and has been for years.
> I can't tell the same of you.

Er... the first person to use the word "crappy" in that entire bug
discussion is, um, you.  Usually when you put quote marks around things
that's supposed to indicate that it's a quote.

That whole bug discussion is rather frustrating due to a collection of
misunderstandings and misconceptions that weren't made easier by a very
aggressive bug reporter, but it looks like it mostly got sorted out.  I'm
not seeing, in that thread, what you're upset about; Fabian could have
probably phrased a few things better, but he de-escalated a
confrontational bug report reasonably well.

--
Russ Allbery ([hidden email])               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87zkbwhvz1.fsf@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Thomas Preud'homme-3
Le dimanche 4 mars 2012 22:55:46, Russ Allbery a écrit :

> Sergio Cipolla <[hidden email]> writes:
> > I'm just a Debian user for some years and I'm writing to this list
> > because I found that at
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814 the Debian
> > Multimedia maintainer Fabian Greffrath was very wrong, by being not
> > only wrong in what he said but also very impolite.
> > I wrote to a follow-up of that bug report (
> > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660924 ) about what I
> > thought of it:
> > "Fabian, who do you think you are to call d-m-o's packages as 'crappy'?
> > d-m-o is a traditional and very respected 3rd party repository for
> > Debian and has been for years.
> > I can't tell the same of you.
>
> Er... the first person to use the word "crappy" in that entire bug
> discussion is, um, you.  Usually when you put quote marks around things
> that's supposed to indicate that it's a quote.
You probably missed [1] then.

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814#10
>
> That whole bug discussion is rather frustrating due to a collection of
> misunderstandings and misconceptions that weren't made easier by a very
> aggressive bug reporter, but it looks like it mostly got sorted out.  I'm
> not seeing, in that thread, what you're upset about; Fabian could have
> probably phrased a few things better, but he de-escalated a
> confrontational bug report reasonably well.

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Fernando Lemos-3
In reply to this post by Sergio Cipolla
Hi,

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 6:28 PM, Sergio Cipolla <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello.
> I'm just a Debian user for some years and I'm writing to this list
> because I found that at
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814 the Debian
> Multimedia maintainer Fabian Greffrath was very wrong, by being not
> only wrong in what he said but also very impolite.

Why is he wrong in what he said? Don't take me wrong, I'm a d-m.o user
myself, but Fabian is entitled to his opinion.

> I wrote to a follow-up of that bug report (
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660924 ) about what I
> thought of it:
> "Fabian, who do you think you are to call d-m-o's packages as 'crappy'?
> d-m-o is a traditional and very respected 3rd party repository for
> Debian and has been for years.

That's way off-topic in the context of that bug report.

> I can't tell the same of you.

Yes, let's make this personal. Classy.

> You know very well why it uses an epoch in their versioning: exactly
> so as people that want/need to use the extra features/packages it
> provides don't mix what shouldn't be mixed with the official Debian
> packages.

And how does that have anything to do with the fact that installing
packages from outside the Debian repositories can introduce
incompatibilities with software installed from the Debian
repositories?

> I'm not sure if you're a Debian Maintainer or not (or worse, Debian
> Developer) but this kind of big mouthing shouldn't be accepted from a
> DM/DD.
> If I find out the proper channel for this I'll raise this subject so
> as the Debian contributors know that they should measure their words
> otherwise they should step down (even a 'do-ocracy' has its limits)."
> So I'm writing to this list to raise this subject that a DM/DD should
> stand to a minimum level of respect, specially when talking about
> fellow contributors (even unofficial).
> Maybe this is already in some sort of code-of-conduct for someone
> applying for DM but if it's not, I leave here my suggestion.

While I personally would try to avoid the language Fabian used, asking
a maintainer to step down solely because of this incident is
ridiculous. Fabian's language in those bug reports isn't uncommon in
the free software community, deal with it.

Someone call the whambulance, quick.

Regards,


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANVYNa-wqOL8Q=-KdMs87tLLfu22qx1s6-YLYTbmn7JdyvLAHw@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Russ Allbery-2
In reply to this post by Thomas Preud'homme-3
"Thomas Preud'homme" <[hidden email]> writes:
> Le dimanche 4 mars 2012 22:55:46, Russ Allbery a écrit :

>> Er... the first person to use the word "crappy" in that entire bug
>> discussion is, um, you.  Usually when you put quote marks around things
>> that's supposed to indicate that it's a quote.

> You probably missed [1] then.

> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814#10

Ah, it's in the other referenced bug.  Sorry about that.  Yeah, I wouldn't
have recommended that approach and that probably is what caused a chunk of
the escalation to start with.

But I stand by my impression of the subsequent discussion: Fabian backed
the discussion back down again and it seems to have become much more
cordial.

--
Russ Allbery ([hidden email])               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ty24hvgk.fsf@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Philipp Kern-4
In reply to this post by Sergio Cipolla
On 2012-03-04, Sergio Cipolla <[hidden email]> wrote:
> "Fabian, who do you think you are to call d-m-o's packages as 'crappy'?
> d-m-o is a traditional and very respected 3rd party repository for
> Debian and has been for years.

It's not.  It's neither traditional nor very respected.  At least not in the
developer community.  The packages do have defects.  There's a reason why
they're not in the official archive.

Kind regards
Philipp Kern, who'd like to see mythtv in the official archive, though


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnjl7q4a.plu.trash@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Gergely Nagy-7
In reply to this post by Sergio Cipolla
Sergio Cipolla <[hidden email]> writes:

> I'm not sure if you're a Debian Maintainer or not (or worse, Debian
> Developer) but this kind of big mouthing shouldn't be accepted from a
> DM/DD.

I don't see a problem. Someone has a strong opinon, and perhaps the way
it came across was a bit harsh, but I don't believe in papering over bad
things by trying to dress them up in fancy words.

As far as I see it, here's how things went: someone installed a package
from a third party repository, that kinda screwed up his system in one
way or the other. So he reported a bug against the Debian package
(despite the recommendation of the 3rd party repository's maintainers,
who clearly stated in the FAQ not to do this), and it got
closed. Perhaps a few strongers words were used than neccessary, but
honestly "crap" is not a word one should be afraid to see.

Some packages - be them in Debian or in third-party repositories - are
far worse than crap. We should not be afraid to call them out on that.

But alas, the story goes further! The reporter does not reopen the
original bug, but files another, with an insult. Further down the
thread, we see this someone using a third party repository, without
seemingly being able to tell it from a normal debian mirror.

I find it strange that someone who edited his own sources.list, would
not take the time to have a look at the site he copied the sources.list
line from, and notice that is by far, not a Debian mirror at all.

Instead, he goes on to insult the maintainers in a manner far crappier
than the way his bug was (rightfully) closed.

Furthermore, a DD/DM need not be aware why a third party source uses an
epoch. And even if they are aware, they need not agree with it.

In any case, a quick glance over the few bugs you linked, I see loads of
problems, and attitude problems, but not from Fabian's side.

--
|8]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87wr70q9xe.fsf@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Norbert Preining
In reply to this post by Sergio Cipolla
Hi Sergio,

On So, 04 Mär 2012, Sergio Cipolla wrote:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660814 the Debian
> Multimedia maintainer Fabian Greffrath was very wrong, by being not

You call "crappy" a strong word? I propose that you watch a bit of
TV or read news papers so that you get used to current level
of "strong" words.

Even if I do not agree with the fact that d-m is crappy, we know that
it has its problems.

> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=660924 ) about what I
> thought of it:
> "Fabian, who do you think you are to call d-m-o's packages as 'crappy'?
> d-m-o is a traditional and very respected 3rd party repository for
> Debian and has been for years.

Umpf, as others said already, you know ...

> If I find out the proper channel for this I'll raise this subject so
> as the Debian contributors know that they should measure their words
> otherwise they should step down (even a 'do-ocracy' has its limits)."

Umpf, you should be thankful even to DD/DMs with strong language,
that they dedicate their free time to make your computer run,
and don't blame them that they don't want to take non-official
repositories into account.

Bottom line, get a real life (and I am not feeling sorry for my strong
language)

Best wishes

Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norbert Preining            preining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan                                 TeX Live & Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094   fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76  A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIFF (n.)
A book, the contents of which are totally belied by its cover. For
instance, any book the dust jacket of which bears the words. 'This
book will change your life'.
                        --- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120304224541.GA1688@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Ben Hutchings-3
In reply to this post by Gergely Nagy-7
On Sun, 2012-03-04 at 23:27 +0100, Gergely Nagy wrote:

> Sergio Cipolla <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> > I'm not sure if you're a Debian Maintainer or not (or worse, Debian
> > Developer) but this kind of big mouthing shouldn't be accepted from a
> > DM/DD.
>
> I don't see a problem. Someone has a strong opinon, and perhaps the way
> it came across was a bit harsh, but I don't believe in papering over bad
> things by trying to dress them up in fancy words.
>
> As far as I see it, here's how things went: someone installed a package
> from a third party repository, that kinda screwed up his system in one
> way or the other. So he reported a bug against the Debian package
> (despite the recommendation of the 3rd party repository's maintainers,
> who clearly stated in the FAQ not to do this), and it got
> closed. Perhaps a few strongers words were used than neccessary, but
> honestly "crap" is not a word one should be afraid to see.
>
> Some packages - be them in Debian or in third-party repositories - are
> far worse than crap. We should not be afraid to call them out on that.
>
> But alas, the story goes further! The reporter does not reopen the
> original bug, but files another, with an insult. Further down the
> thread, we see this someone using a third party repository, without
> seemingly being able to tell it from a normal debian mirror.
>
> I find it strange that someone who edited his own sources.list, would
> not take the time to have a look at the site he copied the sources.list
> line from, and notice that is by far, not a Debian mirror at all.
[...]

Looking at the front page of http://www.debian-multimedia.org/ today, I
don't see a clear statement that it is unofficial.

If you already know the project well, you should know that our official
web sites are all under debian.org (though there is still an exception
to that: debconf.org).  Also, if you look closely, you can infer it from
the references to 'official packages', and down at the bottom of the
page there is a note not to use the Debian BTS.

But for new users and potential users, this distinction probably isn't
obvious.  There is a reason that Debian has pursued trademark
enforcement actions against various debian.xy domains.  And to avoid
singling out debian-multimedia.org, I think this confusion could just as
well happen with repositories on foo.debian.net domains.

Perhaps we need some kind of policy for DDs establishing unofficial
repositories under 'debian' domains.  Nothing too bureaucratic, just a
standard disclaimer that these are the responsiblity of the developer
that established the repository.  Maybe also require redirecting bug
reports, if the repository isn't maintained by or which the blessing of
the official package maintainer.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Every program is either trivial or else contains at least one bug

signature.asc (845 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Daniel Baumann-14
In reply to this post by Fernando Lemos-3
On 03/04/2012 11:05 PM, Fernando Lemos wrote:
> Fabian's language in those bug reports isn't uncommon in
> the free software community, deal with it.

apart from the fact that Fabian is factually right..

just because someone is offended (Fabian, by the initial bug reporter
going mental) doesn't make him right, nor justifies an (admittedly less
than the reporter) agressive tone. and neither does the 'free software
community'.

--
Address:        Daniel Baumann, Donnerbuehlweg 3, CH-3012 Bern
Email:          [hidden email]
Internet:       http://people.progress-technologies.net/~daniel.baumann/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4F53F60C.5040101@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Gergely Nagy-7
In reply to this post by Ben Hutchings-3
Ben Hutchings <[hidden email]> writes:

> Looking at the front page of http://www.debian-multimedia.org/ today, I
> don't see a clear statement that it is unofficial.

There are a ton of hints, nevertheless. I'd like to think that someone
who's adding sources.list entries to his config will spend a moment or
two and look through the page.

A few hints, I, as a user, would find interesting:

* "The first package to install is debian-multimedia-keyring." (near the
  top)

* "If you find some broken dependencies or bugs in these packages, tell
  me and don't report bugs to the BTS.  Upstream bug report should be
  sent to the respective author."

  (Footer)

* "© 2002-2011 Christian Marillat"

There's also the donate button, and a design that doesn't resemble
Debian.org's design in any way, and a lot of other small things.

Perhaps a clearer statement could be added, but I believe that when
someone adds a sources.list line, it's safe to assume that anything not
ending with .debian.org might very well not be official.

> If you already know the project well, you should know that our official
> web sites are all under debian.org (though there is still an exception
> to that: debconf.org).  Also, if you look closely, you can infer it from
> the references to 'official packages', and down at the bottom of the
> page there is a note not to use the Debian BTS.

Indeed. But, perhaps its just me, but I'm on the opinion that until
one's familiar enough with Debian, s/he shouldn't go around adding
repositories. Once one had a look at debian.org, and heard about
third-party repositories, it becomes quite obvious when one encounters
an unofficial mirror.

> Perhaps we need some kind of policy for DDs establishing unofficial
> repositories under 'debian' domains.  Nothing too bureaucratic, just a
> standard disclaimer that these are the responsiblity of the developer
> that established the repository.  Maybe also require redirecting bug
> reports, if the repository isn't maintained by or which the blessing of
> the official package maintainer.

I wouldn't go that far. If anything, I'd put it in our docs, that
anything other than .d.o might not be official, and should be used with
caution. (And to consult the official list of mirrors, if one's looking
for a mirror)

The reason being, we can control our docs, and I'd expect our users to
at least glance through it, from time to time. This way, it'd be
documented once, translated into a million languages, and everyone's
happy. We wouldn't need to come up with boring texts to put on apt
repositories resting on .debian.net domains and suchlike.

--
|8]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sjhoq7kb.fsf@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Russ Allbery-2
In reply to this post by Daniel Baumann-14
Daniel Baumann <[hidden email]> writes:
> On 03/04/2012 11:05 PM, Fernando Lemos wrote:

>> Fabian's language in those bug reports isn't uncommon in the free
>> software community, deal with it.

> apart from the fact that Fabian is factually right..

> just because someone is offended (Fabian, by the initial bug reporter
> going mental) doesn't make him right, nor justifies an (admittedly less
> than the reporter) agressive tone. and neither does the 'free software
> community'.

Wholeheartedly agreed.

I don't think everything was fine.  However, what makes the difference to
me is that Fabian followed that up by de-escalating and calming the
discussion down.  Never getting upset is best, but if people get less and
less upset over the course of the discussion, that's a good sign.

--
Russ Allbery ([hidden email])               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874nu4hs54.fsf@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Sam Hartman-5
In reply to this post by Ben Hutchings-3
On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 10:59:39PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Looking at the front page of http://www.debian-multimedia.org/ today,
> I don't see a clear statement that it is unofficial.

Agreed.

I also find disturbing that the website seeks for donations without
making clear that donated money do not go to the Debian Project. That is
not necessarily done out of malice, of course, but it seems to live in
the same uncertainty about the "unofficiality" of the website that you
mention.

> But for new users and potential users, this distinction probably isn't
> obvious.  There is a reason that Debian has pursued trademark
> enforcement actions against various debian.xy domains.

Agreed, and I've been thinking about debian-multimedia.org since quite a
while. According to our trademark policy (present and draft), the
website is in violation of Debian trademark. As the website is
maintained by a Debian Developer, I'm sure we don't need that specific
aspect to come into some sort of amicable solution.

But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the
website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or
to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is
a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in
<[hidden email]>) to answer. If they
see a problem with debian-multimedia.org, we should get in touch with
the website maintainers and solve the issue.

> And to avoid singling out debian-multimedia.org, I think this
> confusion could just as well happen with repositories on
> foo.debian.net domains.

I think the situations with debian.net is quite different. *.debian.net
is a namespace offered by Debian to developers that want to setup
services which are not (yet) integrated in the Debian infrastructure
and, as such, not yet blessed as official project services. I don't
think we need to have any stricter procedure that the current one for
people to setup *.debian.net entries.

What we need, though, is probably to make it more clear to our users
what is the difference among *.debian.net and *.debian.org services. It
is something that developers know by folklore, but that I seriously
doubt most of our users know. For me, the most appropriate way to do is
to put a splash page at www.debian.net explaining that. If DSA agrees
with that approach, I'm sure we can easily come up with a suitable
splash text.

While we are at it, I also think we should provide an index of
*.debian.net entries on that splash page.
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianNetDomains is just too prone to outdateness
and incompleteness. The index can be automatically generated from LDAP
and. IIRC a past chat with DSA, DSA is fine with that but is aware of
privacy concerns that some of the registrant of *.debian.net entries
might have. Personally, I don't think we should be worried about privacy
concerns there. The debian.net is a Debian project resource and we
should be ready to advertise all its entries, otherwise people should
not register them in the first place.


Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli     zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences   ......   http://upsilon.cc/zack   ......   . . o
Debian Project Leader    .......   @zack on identi.ca   .......    o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

signature.asc (845 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Thijs Kinkhorst-4
On Mon, March 5, 2012 08:40, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 10:59:39PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> Looking at the front page of http://www.debian-multimedia.org/ today,
>> I don't see a clear statement that it is unofficial.

> I also find disturbing that the website seeks for donations without
> making clear that donated money do not go to the Debian Project. That is
> not necessarily done out of malice, of course, but it seems to live in
> the same uncertainty about the "unofficiality" of the website that you
> mention.

I do think that for the specific case there's more than enough hints for
people to assume the "unofficiality"; and of course, debian-multimedia is
well-known in the user community to be an unofficial resource. However,
being explicit about this fact never hurts. I would be in favour to allow
trademark use if an explicit notice was placed on the web page.

> But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the
> website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or
> to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is
> a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in
> <[hidden email]>) to answer. If they
> see a problem with debian-multimedia.org, we should get in touch with
> the website maintainers and solve the issue.

Of course, one of the reasons debian-multimedia exists is precisely
because it's unofficial: it can package things that Debian out of policy
doesn't want to package. This is not something that can necessarily be
solved on a packaging level.

> What we need, though, is probably to make it more clear to our users
> what is the difference among *.debian.net and *.debian.org services. It
> is something that developers know by folklore, but that I seriously
> doubt most of our users know. For me, the most appropriate way to do is
> to put a splash page at www.debian.net explaining that. If DSA agrees
> with that approach, I'm sure we can easily come up with a suitable
> splash text.

That may help a bit, but I don't think many people will regularly consult
the 'www.debian.net' if they ended up on 'something.debian.net' via Google
or a link somewhere. A simple policy could be: "If you provide a service
targeting end users, use an appropriate way inside the used protocol, if
such a way exists, to indicate that this is not an official project
service.". For HTTP this could simply be a sentence in the served HTML,
FTP can use a message, etc.

> The debian.net is a Debian project resource and we
> should be ready to advertise all its entries, otherwise people should
> not register them in the first place.

Indeed. Perhaps we do want to give DD's who took other assumptions on
appropriate use some grace period to relinquish their registrations before
they are published, though.


Thijs


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1c4707f0092a4ba1a4bf0a4f5a46717c.squirrel@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Vsevolod Velichko-2
In reply to this post by Sam Hartman-5
2012/3/5 Stefano Zacchiroli <[hidden email]>:
> What we need, though, is probably to make it more clear to our users
> what is the difference among *.debian.net and *.debian.org services. It
> is something that developers know by folklore, but that I seriously
> doubt most of our users know. For me, the most appropriate way to do is
> to put a splash page at www.debian.net explaining that. If DSA agrees
> with that approach, I'm sure we can easily come up with a suitable
> splash text.

I'd like to put my 2 cents: being a long time Debian user, it's still
rather hard for me to separate debian.net and debian.org. Both domains
are used widely, e.g. unofficial mentors.debian.net is widely used in
d-m list, which is obviously official. These domains look visually
identical, one can't easily tell one from another in apt sources.list.

I suppose there should be used some completely unrelated domain name
(as does Ubuntu with its launchpad.net), or unofficial repositories
should be placed on the address, looking like
"*.unofficial.debian.net" or "unofficial.debian.net/*". Otherwise it
would always lead people to misunderstanding.

Best wishes and have a nice day,
Vsevolod Velichko



> On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 10:59:39PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> Looking at the front page of http://www.debian-multimedia.org/ today,
>> I don't see a clear statement that it is unofficial.
>
> Agreed.
>
> I also find disturbing that the website seeks for donations without
> making clear that donated money do not go to the Debian Project. That is
> not necessarily done out of malice, of course, but it seems to live in
> the same uncertainty about the "unofficiality" of the website that you
> mention.
>
>> But for new users and potential users, this distinction probably isn't
>> obvious.  There is a reason that Debian has pursued trademark
>> enforcement actions against various debian.xy domains.
>
> Agreed, and I've been thinking about debian-multimedia.org since quite a
> while. According to our trademark policy (present and draft), the
> website is in violation of Debian trademark. As the website is
> maintained by a Debian Developer, I'm sure we don't need that specific
> aspect to come into some sort of amicable solution.
>
> But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the
> website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or
> to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is
> a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in
> <[hidden email]>) to answer. If they
> see a problem with debian-multimedia.org, we should get in touch with
> the website maintainers and solve the issue.
>
>> And to avoid singling out debian-multimedia.org, I think this
>> confusion could just as well happen with repositories on
>> foo.debian.net domains.
>
> I think the situations with debian.net is quite different. *.debian.net
> is a namespace offered by Debian to developers that want to setup
> services which are not (yet) integrated in the Debian infrastructure
> and, as such, not yet blessed as official project services. I don't
> think we need to have any stricter procedure that the current one for
> people to setup *.debian.net entries.
>
>
> While we are at it, I also think we should provide an index of
> *.debian.net entries on that splash page.
> http://wiki.debian.org/DebianNetDomains is just too prone to outdateness
> and incompleteness. The index can be automatically generated from LDAP
> and. IIRC a past chat with DSA, DSA is fine with that but is aware of
> privacy concerns that some of the registrant of *.debian.net entries
> might have. Personally, I don't think we should be worried about privacy
> concerns there. The debian.net is a Debian project resource and we
> should be ready to advertise all its entries, otherwise people should
> not register them in the first place.
>
>
> Cheers.
> --
> Stefano Zacchiroli     zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
> Maître de conférences   ......   http://upsilon.cc/zack   ......   . . o
> Debian Project Leader    .......   @zack on identi.ca   .......    o o o
> « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAAtb-VS+PiLHAO+79VUa++raxU6GSwehmvfQpL38nyTJM61bOQ@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A DM/DD should know how to watch his mouth (code of conduct).

Thomas Goirand-3
In reply to this post by Gergely Nagy-7
On 03/05/2012 06:27 AM, Gergely Nagy wrote:
> Perhaps a few strongers words were used than neccessary, but
> honestly "crap" is not a word one should be afraid to see.
>  
And IMO, it's Fabian's right to say that VLC package from d-m.o
is "crappy", because introducing an epoc, which messes with
his packaging.

More over, I have experienced myself the kind of issues one
may have with packages from d-m.o, then trying to upgrade
Debian... It almost screw up my laptop, and I spent few
hours upgrading from Lenny to Squeeze (this was more than
a year ago, so I can't tell exactly what was the issue, but
I am certain it was packages from d-m.o). And the issue that
we are discussing today shows it's not getting any better.

So I agree with Fabian, and I agree with the chosen tone.

Thomas


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4F54891F.6060402@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Thomas Goirand-3
In reply to this post by Sam Hartman-5
On 03/05/2012 03:40 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the
> website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or
> to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is
> a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in
> <[hidden email]>) to answer. If they
> see a problem with debian-multimedia.org, we should get in touch with
> the website maintainers and solve the issue.
>  

I do think this website hurts Debian, and its user community.
Let me explain, it's based on my past *user* experience.

Years ago, I was fooled into thinking that d-m.o was there only to
address licensing issues, and bring packages that couldn't go in
Debian. But d-m.o does a lot more, like re-packaging things that
are already in Debian, and working very well there.

It's not clearly written in d-m.o that it can screw your Debian
installation, particularly when upgrading from version N to version
N+1 of Debian with d-m.o package installed. But I've seen multiple
instances of this issue over the years, on both desktop and server
side. It is *extremely* easy to get confused, and think that the
issue is in Debian itself, when in fact, it's really d-m.o who
fu**ed-up your system. Users will *not* get it, I'm sure of that.

The issue with the donation thing is that d-m.o author could be
seen as a savior, who brings things not in Debian, and thus would
deserve money (as a user, I was fooled into thinking this way in
the past). But the reality is completely different, and I now do
think that the Debian multimedia team would deserve the money a
100 times more than d-m.o author. Yet, they don't get the respect
from the community, and even less the support (this thread is
a proof of it).

Now, I'm really not sure what we can do about the above. Maybe
absolutely nothing...

Everyone has the rights to make alternative (bad) repositories
and advertize (well) about them. Maybe politely asking to mention
better that this is unofficial could be done, but I experienced
the above fully understanding what I was doing, and the fact
that it wasn't official repos. I don't think a bigger mention
of the fact it was unofficial would have helped me in any ways.

Just my 2 cents as a (past, and unhappy) d-m.o user,

Thomas

P.S: Thumbs up to the debian multimedia team for their work
in Squeeze, it is a brilliant desktop thanks to them.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4F548DDA.8060507@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Florian Reitmeir
Hi,

Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/05/2012 03:40 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
>> But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the
>> website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or
>> to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is
>> a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in

> I do think this website hurts Debian, and its user community.
> Let me explain, it's based on my past *user* experience.

nobody is forcing you to install the packages of d-m-o, if you have
problems with them, report bugs, send patches or simple _do_not_ install
them.

> Years ago, I was fooled into thinking that d-m.o was there only to
> address licensing issues, and bring packages that couldn't go in
> Debian. But d-m.o does a lot more, like re-packaging things that
> are already in Debian, and working very well there.

i use/used d-m-o alot, because many packages in debian are stripped of
codecs, or crippled because of a upstream which doesn't care about
patents/licenses.

to expect that any third-party package archive is "stable" enough to
survive an debian dist-upgrade is just brave.

--
Florian Reitmeir
E-Mail: [hidden email]
Tel: +43 650 2661660


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4F5494BA.6060008@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Gergely Nagy-8
Florian Reitmeir <[hidden email]> writes:

> to expect that any third-party package archive is "stable" enough to
> survive an debian dist-upgrade is just brave.

It can be done, though, and it should be the norm. That it is not so,
that's unfortunate, and something we (both the Debian maintainers and
the third-party repo maintainers, together) should improve.

This, however, needs effort from both sides. My experience so far when
building a third-party repo (which includes and replaces a couple of
packages already in Debian) is that the effort isn't all that much, and
well worth it.

--
|8]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwdns4y2.fsf@...

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains

Milan P. Stanic-3
In reply to this post by Thomas Goirand-3
On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 17:56, Thomas Goirand wrote:

> On 03/05/2012 03:40 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the
> > website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or
> > to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is
> > a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in
> > <[hidden email]>) to answer. If they
> > see a problem with debian-multimedia.org, we should get in touch with
> > the website maintainers and solve the issue.
> I do think this website hurts Debian, and its user community.
> Let me explain, it's based on my past *user* experience.

I don't agree with you here.
For me d-m.o was (and still is) valuable resource.
Some codecs missing in Debian packages because of the policy (I don't
blame Debian for that) and in that case d-m.o is best option for me
because I don't want/have time to package it from the source.

[...]

--
Kind regards,  Milan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120305105215.GB27000@...

123