FESCo Meeting Minutes (2015-03-04)

Stephen John Smoogen smooge at gmail.com
Mon Mar 9 15:39:40 UTC 2015

On 9 March 2015 at 00:19, Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Here is my point .
> > Here is where you guys think it is     ----------<30 light
> > years>----------------> .
> I admit I like the irony of you complaining about my use of metaphor
> while yours fails to state whose point is on earth and therefore I
> have no idea if being 30 light years away from your point is
> necessarily a bad thing. I like air.
> > The point I am worried about is that Chris and you are treating this as a
> > binary problem versus a spectrum one.
> No, I'm treating it as someone bringing a dead cat to a dinner party
> problem.
> When someone says a compulsory password quality policy is actionable,
> they are telling me my judgement cannot be trusted for my own device,

without respect to context. And yet I see other OS's, distros, mobile
> devices, none of which have such a requirement or are yet even more
> permissive, and that makes me distrust these proponents. A gap in
> trust has formed, and widens as proponents don't even acknowledge such
> concerns and push for the change violating myriad long standing
> expectations in the relationship between user, device and OS. But I
> must comply if I depend on the GUI installer, and this abrogation
> constitutes a misfeasance. That makes me mad because it's unfair.
> I challenge you to find a single flaw in that sequence.
There are multiple ways. I could go to the extreme and say your first
questionable judgement was that you used a distribution and allowed others
to decide for you what packages were in the core, which versions, which
compiler options. Coming in at the end and saying 'woah this is takes away
my rights from my device.' is really closing the doors after the barn.
However that would just make take the argument to the next Godwin level and
waste a lot of electrons.

I could go with the paternalistic dad route and remind you life ain't fair
and the world doesn't revolve around you. However the image of you stamping
your feet while using big words like misfeasance makes me giggle... so I
can't use that.

I could go with that the gap you say exists occurred because you and every
other person took to it as an extreme insult and didn't try to start a
conversation. And then accused the part of not listening after basically
insulting their work in the first place. They may have brought a dead cat
to the party, you took a piss in their beer and told them to drink up. And
I am saying this coming from the point that I agreed with the general
reasons you guys brought up but your entire approach has peeved me off.

> All I'm saying is, take the dead cat off the table. There are plenty
> of other things to discuss before things are so dire we have to
> seriously consider eating road kill.
> > I am more worried about the general case of the process of this 'request
> for
> > change'. If all it is going to take to make a team do something would be
> a
> > lot of email requests..
> I don't know what general case you're referring to, or what in actual
> practice about it worries you or what your propose as an alternative.
> The process I was mainly referring to is the entirety of 2nd paragraph
> of self-contained change here:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy
> --
> Chris Murphy
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct

Stephen J Smoogen.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20150309/ebe92501/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the devel mailing list