[Mageia-dev] rehashing the faac issue

Tue Oct 30 02:11:59 CET 2012

2012/10/30 Olivier Blin <mageia at blino.org>:
+> Wolfgang Bornath <molch.b at googlemail.com> writes:
+>
+>> There has been a wide consensus for the solution to put it into
+>> tainted as has been said in this thread as well.
+>
+> The consensus was maybe not so clear then.
+
+Maybe not so clear for those whose opinion differs from the consensus,
+understandable. I did not write about a consensus as first one, it has
+been written repeatedly by others.
+
+>> Sorry if it is too offending for one or the other if I call this
+>> procedure "ridiculous".
+>
+> Where do you see a procedure here? :-)
+> Offer one if you think that's needed.
+
+Ah, in case you have missed all those mails in the devel list:
+1. The issue was brought to the attention of the people, including the
+developers.
+2. The issue has been discussed at length including mantra-like repetitions.
+3. Several people suggested the same solution (we did not start a poll
+but to me it looked like a large part of the participants of the
+discussion). If I am wrong here then all others who saw it like me are
+wrong as well
+4. All it needed now was action according to that consensus.
+
+This is what I call a procedure and how issues have been treated many
+times. May be your definition is different.
+
+After the discussion reached this state everybody waited for action,
+which may have ver well have been delayed because of other more
+important work. That was the subject/contents of the opening mail and
+first answers of this thread. Until somebody started to open the
+discussion again.
+
+Another option would have been to bring the issue to the council after
+the first discussion ended but I haven't yet read any mail about such
+a move during the months since then.
+Is that what you were waiting for?
+
+> It could be up to the council or board to chose the lesser evil between:
+> - picking tainted for non-free + tainted packages like faac, and thus
+>   forbid mirroring tainted packages that are only free-software
+>   (but maybe that's the hypothetical 'selective mirror admin' from Guillaume)
+
+yes, you've been calling those existing mirror maintainers
+"hypothetical" before. Very good argument. If I don't like something I
+just pretend it isn't there.
+
+Anyhow, I said my opinion in the first thread including the reasons
+behind my opinion. The outcome of this is not so interesting (I could
+use the blogdrake solution any time), I'm ok with any decision or
+consensus. But it is the way this issue is handled which I criticise.
+
+-- 
+wobo
+