SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Debian project has suffered from a long string of negative events recently, ranging from severe discontent over the inclusion of systemd, to talk of forking the project, to a grave bug affecting the important 'wine' package, to the resignation and reduced involvement of long time contributors.
The latest strife affecting Debian revolves around a request for a Debian package of the GPC-Slots 2 software. This request has been rejected with little more than an ad hominem attack against the software's author.
In response to the request, Stephen Gran wrote,
This is code by someone who routinely trolls Debian. I doubt we want any more poisonous upstreams in Debian, so I at least would prefer this never get packaged.
Jonathan Wiltshire proceeded to mark the request as 'wontfix', and closed it.
While Debian does strive to maintain high standards regarding the software it packages, the negative and personal nature of this rejection, without any apparent technical or licensing concerns, appears to conflict with Debian's own Code of Conduct. Such a personal attack could be seen as contradictory to the Code of Conduct's mandate that Debian participants "Be respectful", "Be collaborative", and most importantly, "Assume good faith".
Given its recent troubles as of late, many of them concerning the poor treatment of Debian developers and users alike, can Debian really afford to get embroiled in yet another negative incident?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Tuesday November 25 2014, @08:32AM
It may do what it is programmed to do - or so you think. However, what has been programmed is not what I expect in a slot game. Why include the rant against women in the program? Is it an integral part of the game? I suggest 'No'. Why does it have easter eggs at all? Is it what the title or description of the game says the program contains? Again, I suggest 'No'. So my first response is that the game is not what it purports to be. Therefore I side with Debian on their decision not to include it.
Having had several people give their views on the quality of the code - people whose views I respect, because I have seen at first hand what they are capable of here on this site - the code in the program is of very poor quality. It is likely, therefore, to include bugs. They will not do what I, nor you, expect the game to do. Again, I tend to agree with Debian's decision that it is not worth the effort of packaging and distributing it. At best, it will reflect poorly on their other software and, at worst, it may well have hidden functions about which the user will have no inkling. Debian's decision is looking like it is the correct one.
Finally, we have a saying in the military - don't shit on your own doorstep! So after years of trolling Debian, of rants here and elsewhere regarding the actions of the Debian team, and (in my own personal view) of unacceptable and unwarranted insults to individuals who are supporting Debian, the program writer now wants them to support his poor efforts at programming? My response would be somewhat stronger than Debian's has been - but it would have contained the same message - 'No'. He has brought this upon himself.
Debian was wrong to simply annotate the game submission as 'unwanted - wontfix' - they should have had the decency to describe, as I have done, why the software is simply not good enough for inclusion. The end result would have been the same but it would have taken a little more effort on the part of Debian to achieve it. If the author has any sense at all, he will learn from this and try to improve his programming skills. Perl is a powerful language but it is being used as if by a child. Yes, it might meet the author's standards, but he will never be a programmer of any repute if that is the level of ability that he displays in all his other efforts.
But the worst mistake, in my view, is that he brought his petty views and complaints to this site. Those of his ilk have had their chance with me - and they have blown it! I, unlike Debian, have responded so that you know why I hold these views. I also suspect that you and the author are one and the same. By all means reply if you must - but neither you nor he will receive any further explanations from me.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 25 2014, @12:28PM
Debian is not correct.
They weren't correct when they removed the "hotgirls" package.
They weren't correct when they booted Ted Walther out.
And they aren't correct now.
What they are is scum.
Also, fuck systemd.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 25 2014, @12:30PM
"Why does it have easter eggs at all?"
Because opensource is NOT about professionalism.
It's a hobby and it's for fun.
Clearly you weren't around even 10 years ago here.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday November 25 2014, @02:50PM
From my SN page:
I first got involved in software in 1979 and have followed Unix, Windows, and Linux from whenever each was available. Big business requires professionalism from Linux - and it gets it. The fact that this particular piece of software is well below that standard does not mean that all FOSS should strive to be of the same low standard.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 26 2014, @09:02AM
Nor does it mean that all software written by hobbyists should cater to big businesses you fuck.
Go and FUCK yourself.
Oh, and go and do it for free, in a professional manner, heeding codes of conduct and standards.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday November 26 2014, @10:02AM
My, my - you don't like losing an argument, do you?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 26 2014, @01:03PM
The argument wasn't lost. You appealed to commercialism in a discussion about free software.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 25 2014, @12:32PM
Something extremely statically typed, much like an old basic program, is less likely to have
bugs than something written "cleverly". You can see exactly how the logic will unfold once
it hits the iron because it uses hardly any language features not found in lower level
languages like ASM (the exception being not having to mess with a stack...)