Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.project > #12901 > unrolled thread

Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community?

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.project

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? "Andrew M.A. Cater" <amacater@einval.com> - 2022-09-14 23:00 +0200
    Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? Clément Hermann <nodens@debian.org> - 2022-09-15 13:40 +0200
    Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2022-09-15 17:40 +0200
    Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2022-09-16 16:30 +0200
      Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2022-09-16 22:00 +0200
      Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> - 2022-09-17 05:50 +0200
        Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community? Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2022-09-17 16:30 +0200

#12901 — Re: Are users of Debian software members of the Debian community?

[Poster is cc'd by me because he is not subscribed to the debian-project list]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 03:17:03PM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
> On 9/14/2022 12:22 PM, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> > People of debian-user :)
> >
> > This thread does seem to be degenerating slightly into accusations and
> > name-calling, justified or not. Without prejudice to anyone: please may
> > I remind you that debian-user and all Debian lists and IRC channels are
> > subject to the Debian Code of Conduct.
> >
> > It would be very much appreciated if disagreements could be resolved
> > constructively and in a positive way. Ad hominem attacks don't help
> > anyone here. Taking a breath / walking away from the keyboard for half
> > a day might also help get a sense of perspective in any mailing list
> > opinion difference. (And yes, I know about https://xkcd.com/386/ and
> > the difficulty that brings).
> >
> > With every good wish, as ever,
> >
> > Andy Cater
> >
> > [For and on behalf of the Debian Community Team]
> >
> 
> Thanks for this, Andy, I admit I did get caught up in behavior that appears
> as trolling.
> 
> As you point out, the aforementioned thread only slightly has degenerated
> and I think there are some useful discussions in it despite the problems.
> One legitimate topic for discussion that arose in that thread is:
> 
> Are only Debian Developers with voting rights (DDs) considered to be members
> of the Debian community, or are the users also members of the Debian community?
> 

Hi Chuck,

I'm going to assume good intent and answer you as best I can. At its heart,
Debian is a "do-ocracy" and you get out of it what you're able to put into
it. We're all volunteers and that has to be remembered.

"The community" in its broadest sense is the developers, maintainers,
contributors and the users - everyone building and using Debian for whatever
purpose. You don't normally get recognition just for using Debian but you
build up a reputation by contributing. 

You don't have to be a Debian maintainer or a Debian developer to contribute.
You can file good bug reports - or check reports opened by other people and
reply if your experience is similar/you're using identical hardware, say, and
the bug bites you. You can contribute to the Wiki, you can contribute 
positively to the mailing lists. You don't get a vote in general resolutions
(GRs) but you're involved. "Drive by contributors" often gradually decide they
want to become a Debian Maintainer. That means going through a formal process
to check on the sorts of things you can contribute. From there, the step
to being a Debian Developer is relatively small. At that point, you get a 
formal vote on burning issues like GRs.

You  can get a lot more information by looking at the wiki, the documentation
for new maintainers, installing the Debian Administrators handbook - package
debian-handbook .

> If Debian users are also members of the community, their opinion should be
> valued, but what mechanism exists for the voice of Debian users to be heard in
> the decisions that DDs make about the Debian Project? I ask this question
> because AFAICT, the users have no formal voice at all in the decisions about
> how the Debian Project is run. And this fact is perhaps why I am misunderstood
> by some on debian-user. Debian-user seems to be dominated by the idea that
> a mere user of Debian software should have no voice in the decisions, no matter
> how great or how small that decision might be, that the Debian Project has to
> face each day. For example, a little decision: a package maintainer decides
> whether or not to respond to a bug report, and a big decision: the DDs vote
> on resolutions to determine the level of support for non-default init systems.
> 

I'd suggest to anyone to read the mailing list archives for a while and see how
they show Debian and the decision processes we have internally.
https://lists.debian.org/ is a good start. 

Big decisions can take a *long* time and some can be divisive: systemd 
discussions went on for months, sometimes with increasing rancour and
misunderstandings on all sides but that was, perhaps, exceptional in
recent years.

> I think Debian users should have some say, some voting power, some way
> of influencing the direction of the Debian Project because in the end the
> long-term success of the project depends on whether or not Debian software
> is continues to be useful for its users over the long term. I think if over time
> Debian becomes software that is only useful to the DDs and not to a large
> pool of users around the world who are passionate about free software,
> Debian would have failed in its mission of providing useful free software to
> users around the world. The point of view of users, IMHO, needs more
> representation in the official decisions and policies of Debian because it
> seems to me that the importance of providing useful software for the
> many users of Debian software is not sufficiently recognized on, of all
> places, the mailing list for Debian users!
> 

_Which_ Debian users? We have users all over the world, on the ISS, every
continent. We've folk of all shades of politics, religion. We've got
people from every human background. Debian doesn't *just* become software
that's useful to DDs - there are >200 derivative distributions and a 29
year backstory.

Debian-user is a subset of people who are interested in Debian. Some are
opinionated, some are long-suffering, some are decidedly idiosyncratic -
that's all OK. It shouldn't be taken as the whole project, just the
folk who hang out on that list.

> I offer this as food for though to see if the way Debian is governed can
> be improved to ensure the legitimate voices of Debian users are heard. I
> especially would be interested to hear practical suggestions for how a vote
> of users on any particular issue could take place, what weight should be given
> to the vote of the users relative to the vote of the DDs, how users could propose
> that a change in Debian Policy be put up for a vote, and how to ensure only
> true users of Debian vote on any particular proposal or in the election of the
> DPL, etc.
> 

I *really* suggest you look at the mechanism of Debian consensus: it's often
difficult to follow debian-vote but that's only pulling together a thousand
or so individuals, each with their own voices and legitimate interests.

"True users of Debian" - hmm, is that people who've been using and 
contributing to Debian for 25 years, 2 years, 2 weeks? Sorry, I'm bemused
by this - Debian reputation goes upwards, downwards and sideways to 
everybody else that contributes but it is built on contribution above all.

> I understand this idea cannot be implemented soon. But would it be wrong
> for someone to propose the idea that Debian users should have a formal
> voice in the decisions that the Debian Project needs to face on a daily basis?
> 

You do have a formal voice as a Debian user but it may come at the cost of
commitment.

> N.B. I am not subscribed to debian-project, so if those who respond could Cc
> me on replies, I would appreciate it. I also am not posting this to debian-user,
> to which I am subscribed, to let the emotions die down there a bit and in
> recognition of the fact that debian-user is probably not the best place to post
> this question at this time.
> 

Debian mailing list code of conduct: ideally, you subscribe to a list rather
than posting and expecting individuals to reply, not least because the
replies are then appropriately ordered and threaded in the archives of the
list. https://www.debian.org/MailingLists/ refers. Most of the people who
are subscribed to the mailing lists will not cc by default.

In this case, you are a .cc addressee precisely because you have said you
are not subscribed and so I have explicitly changed my normal policy.

> Best regards,
> 
> Chuck

With every good wish, as ever,

Andy Cater 

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#12903

Hi,


Le 15/09/2022 à 12:37, Chuck Zmudzinski a écrit :

> 
> Obviously, my proposal would need to somehow define who are the users
> that should be given a formal vote for GRs, the DPL, etc. Maybe "true users
> of Debian" is the wrong phrase to define it, maybe the correct idea is expressed
> by "contributor with voting rights." Maybe the voting developers can
> nominate contributors who are not developers who should be given voting
> rights, and if the person nominated receives a simple majority, or some higher
> majority like 2/3, then that person gains voting rights even though that person
> is not a developer. The theory behind my proposal is that there is a diversity
> of viewpoints that stems from a diversity of roles within the project. If the
> voting members are restricted only to the contributors who volunteer for
> the role of developer, then the full diversity of the Debian community is
> not reflected in a vote that only comes from the pool of formal developers.

I would just like to point out that it is possible (and it has been 
done) to become a Debian Member with voting rights without a developer 
role. This is what we call "Debian Developer, non-uploading" (or Debian 
Member).

You have to be a contributor, still, and follow the New Member process - 
more information is available at
https://www.debian.org/devel/join/newmaint
> 
> I subscribed to the debian-project list for the time being so you can reply on-list
> from now on.

ACK :)

Cheers,

-- 
nodens

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12904

Chuck Zmudzinski <brchuckz@netscape.net> writes:

> The theory behind my proposal is that there is a diversity of viewpoints
> that stems from a diversity of roles within the project. If the voting
> members are restricted only to the contributors who volunteer for the
> role of developer, then the full diversity of the Debian community is
> not reflected in a vote that only comes from the pool of formal
> developers.

I think it depends a lot what the viewpoints are being diverse *over*.  If
you've formed a group of people to go pick up litter, it's not helpful to
have a diversity of opinions about whether or not litter should be picked
up.  That is just silly.  And, somewhat more on point, it's not helpful to
have a bunch of members who have no intention of going out on the street
and picking up litter, but who have strong opinions about how other people
should do so.  This is not useful diversity.

There are numerous Linux distributions with different viewpoints about how
to make a Linux distribution.  That's diversity, real diversity, in terms
of distribution goals and structure.  It's the kind of diversity that
involves completely independent organizations making completely
independent decisions with different financial structures, different
founding principles, and so forth.  As a Linux user, you can explore that
diversity by picking and choosing which distributions you install and use.

Within any given project, including Debian, we're all trying to do
something together, which inherently requires some amount of agreement and
consensus.  At some level, this is the opposite of a diversity of opinion.
We have to roughly agree on a course of action, at least at some level and
with some rough, in order to make forward progress.  One of the things
that's helpful to avoid endless decision paralysis, or to avoid a bunch of
people who are not in a position to do the work voting for things the
people who are doing the work don't want to do, is that we ask everyone
who is voting on major decisions to have significant skin in the game.
The implicit assumption behind GR voting is that to some extent you're
then going to go help implement what we all voted for, because we're the
only people who can.

The voters are the same group as the implementors.  We're using voting to
help guide consensus among the same group that has to do the work.  If no
one does the work, the GR is useless and pointless and there's no reason
to have held it.  That tends to significantly inform our voting.  It's
something that I think about with every GR.

To make that concrete, you can hold as many GRs as you would like saying
that every bug in Debian with a tested patch should be applied and
uploaded, and it will accomplish precisely nothing.  Changing who votes on
such GRs is useless; the whole theoretical model behind such a vote is
wrong.  Work happens in Debian because someone does it.  Voting doesn't
change that; what changes that is more people doing work.

If you think a package is being neglected by its maintainer, we have
processes for that, but they mostlly require that you, the person who
wants to make a change, step up and be the maintainer.  If no one is
willing to step up and be the maintainer, the package will continue to be
neglected.  Voting is not a magic spell.

> Michael Stone followed me to this list and condemned for me asking
> questions here on this list. There is no way *he* considers me a member
> of the Debian community who has a formal voice as a Debian user.

This is Michael thinking you're being annoying and wasting people's time
and telling you so, while warning other people who don't follow
debian-user that arguing with you may be futile.  It has nothing to do
with whether or not he considers you a member of a community.  I can
assure you that he'd say the same thing to a DPL if he thought they were
being annoying and futile to argue with.

-- 
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)              <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12912

On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 06:37:03AM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
>The difficult cost of trying to have a voice as a Debian user is *not* the commitment, it
>is enduring the ad hominem attacks when I express my opinion. Of course if I cannot
>overcome the stigma of the ad hominem attacks, my voice is completely nullified
>by those ad hominem attacks. And they continue. Michael Stone followed me to
>this list and condemned for me asking questions here on this list. There is no way
>*he* considers me a member of the Debian community who has a formal voice as
>a Debian user. 

Since you've been complaining about how people react to your messages 
for quite some time, perhaps you might change the way you write your 
messages?

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994899#5

When people give you negative feedback, you announce that they are 
"attacking" or "defaming" you.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2021/09/msg00785.html

And the pattern continues with new messages periodically complaining
about debian, followed by "oh, I understand now" type messages, then the
same complaints get recycled again later.

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2022/08/msg00370.html

https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2022/09/msg00267.html

There are a lot of walls of text that just don't seem to ever lead
anywhere. In the message I'm replying to you wrote 90+ lines, took the 
time to call me out for "attacking" you, asked some rhetorical 
questions, but never explained a particular problem that debian might be 
able to address. You want other people to read volumes but show no sign 
of changing based on the feedback you get, repeatedly complaining about 
'bugs not being fixed' without mentioning what bugs so people could 
actually engage with you on why a particular bug might not have been 
fixed. (You did it yet again in the message I'm replying to--after 
specifically stating at the start of this thread that your last thread 
on the topic degenerated so you were going to switch lists and focus on 
something different!) I can't see how we can possibly improve your 
experience with debian until you stop the long meta-discussions about 
vague concerns and find a way to clearly communicate what problems we 
might help you to fix. If you want better results, keep your 
communications direct and actionable.

In fact, this is basically what you were told a year ago in one of the 
threads where you complained that you were being attacked:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994899#10

"You've filed a new bug so make the exact problem the primary part of 
this bug. Don't ask of others to read a '50 page document' and expect 
them to distill YOUR problem themselves. Doing a copy+paste of the 
*relevant* part is absolutely fine."

You have now sent a message about a particular udev issue to debian-user 
and I replied with one immediate thought. Some more thoughts: you're 
using a fairly obscure configuration. Most people running interactive 
VMs (e.g., on a desktop with a graphical console) aren't using Xen, 
they're using kvm or virtualbox or just about anything else. People 
running Xen are much more likely to use something like debootstrap 
rather than going through an installer. So the number of people who 1) 
can duplicate the problem and 2) are likely to do so, is pretty small. 
The reality is that this will affect how much attention the problem 
gets. As mentioned several times, by several people, you have a tendancy 
to write enormous volumes of text. Just reading the logs of the bugs 
associated with your issue was exhausting. There are no concise 
summaries, there are no small patches to help identify/isolate an issue. 
(There is, for example, a 1700 line patch in 994899 which basically 
reverts an entire set of functionality; maintainers generally prefer 
minimal and well understood changes. The eventual fix from upstream 
corrected several issues but didn't rip out all the associated 
functionality to do so.) It's not enough to say that something like that 
fixes a problem for you, unless it's clear what the effect would be on 
the set of people whose systems are currently working but who might be 
negatively affected by the change. For your udev problem I would 
probably focus on why the runtime behavior is different than the 
installer behavior, and try to make the installer behave like the 
runtime. (Runtime doesn't require kernel patches, etc., so it seems 
unlikely those are necessary to fix the problem.) If you can isolate 
that to something you can express clearly and produce a patch to correct 
you'll probably get a positive response. If you continue to send massive 
volumes of roundabout reports, then complain that you aren't getting 
enough attention, it's much less likely that anyone will choose to spend 
time working with you on this.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12919

On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 01:54:09PM -0400, Chuck Zmudzinski wrote:
>On 9/16/22 10:13 AM, Michael Stone wrote:
>> You have now sent a message about a particular udev issue to debian-user
>> and I replied with one immediate thought. Some more thoughts: you're
>> using a fairly obscure configuration.
>
>I thought Debian was free and I can use it that way if I want
>to, and that is how I understand Debian's philosophy of free
>software. Do you understand it differently?

unbelievable

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12926

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, 2022-09-16 at 10:13 -0400, Michael Stone wrote:

> Most people running interactive VMs (e.g., on a desktop with a
> graphical console) aren't using Xen, they're using kvm or virtualbox
> or just about anything else.

While the number is probably less, some people (including Debian
contributors) are using Qubes (which is based on Xen) on desktops:

https://www.qubes-os.org/

-- 
bye,
pabs

https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#12927

On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 11:12:54AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>On Fri, 2022-09-16 at 10:13 -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> Most people running interactive VMs (e.g., on a desktop with a
>> graphical console) aren't using Xen, they're using kvm or virtualbox
>> or just about anything else.
>
>While the number is probably less, some people (including Debian
>contributors) are using Qubes (which is based on Xen) on desktops:
>
>https://www.qubes-os.org/

*I* use qubes, as well as xen on its own, which is why I'm fairly 
comfortable asserting that bullseye works just fine for typical use 
cases on both platforms. I haven't taken any particular measures to work 
around the bug under discussion--it's just never come up. In qubes you 
aren't generally working with a virtualized bare metal system (i.e., 
watching a bios boot screen come up on a virtual monitor after booting 
from an iso), you're interacting with a templated thin vm via 
qubes-specific I/O channels. The underlying tech may be xen, but the way 
it is used is different.

(Conversely, when I do want that "boot a virtual bare metal system from 
an ISO" experience I do so on a different computer, currently via KVM 
and previously via virtualbox or vmware.)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.project

csiph-web