SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/11/msg00174.html
Joey Hess has apparently left Debian after 18 years, stating that the Debian Constitution is leading Debian in "very unhealthy directions".
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Tempt not a desperate man.
-- William Shakespeare, "Romeo and Juliet"
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Sunday November 09 2014, @09:20PM
With respect, I think you are reading it wrong. His previous posts indicate that he backed and respected the previous TC decision process and felt it was inappropriate for someone to try and overrule all the effort that went into that by appealing to a different forum, and doing it 2 weeks before release freeze. He also believed it was an abuse of process:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2014/10/msg00246.html [debian.org]
I don't know what his position is on systemd itself, and I'm not sure it matters. I have had stand up rows with PHBs for trying to micromanage and override technical decisions at incredibly stupid points in the development cycle, after they had not wanted to be involved in all the technical discussions leading to the decision. It wouldn't have mattered which side of the decision I was on, if I even took a side - I would back my technical team's right to make their technical decisions at the right point in the development cycle and have them respected. In exactly the same way, I would _not_ (and would _not_ back a developer who wanted to) go to the PHB a day before quarter accounts deadline to suggest that the revenue recognition model is wrong (whether I thought it was or not).
The comment you have linked is not at all about the TC default-systemd vote, it is about more recent discussions on how the init system should be selected on upgrade. His point seems to be that this was all already resolved by consensus with all the relevant init package maintainers, but then someone stepped in and made it political, together with statements that he (see https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/11/msg00047.html) [debian.org] interpreted as overriding the current work on upgrade path. I don't think it is a coincidence that the same person was also behind the GR, and consider it entirely possible that breakdown in relations between those two people has lead to this resignation. Interestingly it appears to be not the only recent TC resignation...
(Score: 2) by Marand on Sunday November 09 2014, @11:56PM
You're right, I missed that it was a follow-up TC vote instead of discussion about the original one. That puts things back where my longer post left them: the whole thing still stinks.
I can understand him (and others) being pissed that people want to undermine the TC decision, but I also still think that the way the vote was handled in the first place fueled that fire. This was an odd thing for Debian: a distro that cautiously approaches sweeping changes has jumped head first into this one, despite problems, lack of maturity in the solutions, and a lack of consensus in the TC.
It's also looking like either Debian's policies or its people aren't holding up well when faced with contentious decisions. Hopefully the end result is that things end up better, with a stronger Debian. If not, though, there will still be other options. Not that I wish ill on the project or its members. Not at all, in fact. I've generally had good interactions with Debian and KDE folk (which is one of many reasons I still use Debian+KDE), so it's kind of a shame that this crap is happening. Still, maybe a shake-up will be good in the long-term, either for Debian or for something new that may come from it.