On Saturday 21 November 2015 15:16:30 Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> 2015-11-21 14:53 GMT+01:00 Andrew Shadura <andrew@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Because as it is now, we do indeed look bad. Some action is required, I
> > believe.
> I'm not exactly sure that there is any possible action or press note
> that at the same time will provide the context, improve Debian image,
> take care of Daniel's feelings, not make things worse, etc. I think
> that we're trying to come out with something that makes everyone
> happy, and that's simply not possible in this case.
I hope it doesn't mean that we should not try.
> Anyway, I think that Joerg Jaspert is right when he says that the
> project (as a whole) hasn't done anything wrong to him and there's
> nothing to fix at the moment. In fact, an official note from the
> project as a whole addressing this issue would create a dangerous
> precedent that would force us to make equivalent public notes in many
> other cases.
No, we are not precedent-driven. I'm sure we will always consider appropriate
response on case-to-case basis.
I believe public statement would be appropriate.
Consider hypothetical situation: suppose there is entirely unsubstantiated
article published somewhere accusing Debian of doing something which is not
true. General public may not know if that's the case and official response to
rumours may be appropriate to clarify situation.
Here we have situation which is not exactly presenting Debian in a best
light. How would it hurt if public statement briefly describe recent changes
in CD/live and express gratitude to Daniel for his past contributions?
IMHO team statement is better than nothing but project statement should be OK
All the best,
GPG key : 4096R/53968D1B
You have to start with the truth. The truth is the only way that we can
get anywhere. Because any decision-making that is based upon lies or
ignorance can't lead to a good conclusion.
-- Julian Assange, 2010
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.