[csw-maintainers] Call for vote: -dev vs. -devel

[Peter FELECAN]

Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:

> On 2/24/11, Peter FELECAN <pfelecan at opencsw.org> wrote:
>> Philip Brown <phil at bolthole.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 2/24/11, Maciej Bliziński <maciej at opencsw.org> wrote:
>>>>  I'm inclined to do no writeup whatsoever, and only
>>>> include a link to this thread:
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/2011-February/014148.html
>>>>
>>>
>>> which will ensure that some people will not read it.
>>
>> Why do you think so? It's a URI accessible for everybody, isn't it?
>>...
>>> Each "side" gets complete control over their part of the writeup.
>>> There should only be editorial fiddling, if either one side gives
>>> *factually incorrect* statements, or it is just ludicrously long. (3x
>>> the length of the other side, or something)
>>
>> The message at the head of this thread cites a honest summary that
>> Dagobert has done. There is nothing wrong with that. Or is it?
>>
>
> ironically, I think you just proved my point, "people wont read the
> thread". Because if you had (re?)read the whole thread rather than
> just the first article, you would already know my viewpoint on
> Dagobert's summary.

You misunderstood my remark: I referred to the message at the head of
*this* thread, the one that contains *this* message and which was cited
in Maciej's call for vote:

2011/2/15 Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org>:
>> Is there any new input? If no I suggest getting to a vote.
>> (1) CSW*-dev   *_dev
>> (2) CSW*-devel  *_devel
>> While the current OpenCSW standard is (2) the solution (2) is short leaving
>> more space for package names, is consistent with other packaging projects
>> and without loss of meaning.

In conclusion, if somebody wants to be informed can have your opinion and
act upon it.

> Now, speaking of "what's wrong with that?" questions... what's wrong
> with my proposal about ballot writeups?

In principle nothing, except that IMO this is a desultory diversion: we
discussed the subject during 10 days, all the opinions were exposed,
including yours, the ballot was set up after 10 additional days, which,
given the circumstances is justified, viz. Dublin Camp, and it ends in 6
days, which in my opinion is to long; that is almost one month to make a
relatively small decision. If, for every decision on which a vote is
taken, we spend a month, our speed is that of an enraged snail... It's a
clear testbed case for the processes which govern our community. So,
lets try to do it without endless discussion about how.
-- 
Peter