> tsmithe: I've been pressing for prevu
<LaserJock> most upstreams don't want to maintain their packages
<jdong> tsmithe: less pressing right now because of time constraints and just being fed up
<LaserJock> that's what the distro devs are for
<tsmithe> jdong, and it's not in? i'm supprised
<sabdfl> it's like this. when you set up a social process, it evolves to suit a certain way of thinking
<tsmithe> *surprised
<sabdfl> but it can often be bad for people who have a different way of thinking
<jdong> tsmithe: a half-baked got in only after insistence, but getting newer versions in is less fun than a frontal lobotomy.
<sabdfl> i'm saying that we need to consider that perhaps our processes could be broadened
<sabdfl> lots of distributions make this mistake
<sabdfl> they think they are more important than upstream, because they are closer to the user
<sabdfl> thats only half the picture
<ScottK> And when you set up social processes, you have to consider change very carefully or you will inadvertently break them.
<sabdfl> that's why we invite lots of upstreams to our conferences, and sponsor them
<sabdfl> ScottK: that's true
<sabdfl> hence this discussion
<Amaranth> sabdfl: i don't think anyone here feels that
<sabdfl> Amaranth: feels what?
<Amaranth> that we're more important than upstream
<sabdfl> well, it would never be expressed that way
<sabdfl> but consider carefully the example here
<LaserJock> what example though?
<Amaranth> beryl?
<sabdfl> we said "your packages are not good enough, we'll help you make them better, but we won't publish them till they are perfect"
<LaserJock> we did a lot of work to help the beryl people
<LaserJock> sabdfl: we did not!!!
<ScottK> sabdfl: This doesn't particularly feel like discussion to me.
> tsmithe: I've been pressing for prevu 
 < LaserJock > most upstreams don't want to maintain their packages 
 < jdong > tsmithe: less weigh justly now because of time constraints and precisely being fed up 
 < LaserJock > that's what the distro devs are for 
 < tsmithe > jdong, and it's not in? i'm supprised 
 < sabdfl > it's like this. when you set up a social summons, it evolve to suit a certain way of thinking 
 < tsmithe > * surprised 
 < sabdfl > but it can often be regretful for people who have a different way of intend 
 < jdong > tsmithe: a half - baked got in only after insistence, but get newer versions in is less fun than a frontal lobotomy. 
 < sabdfl > i'm saying that we want to consider that perhaps our processes could be broadened 
 < sabdfl > tons of distributions make this mistake 
 < sabdfl > they think they are more important than upstream, because they are close to the user 
 < sabdfl > that s only half the picture 
 < ScottK > And when you set up social processes, you have to consider change very carefully or you will inadvertently break them. 
 < sabdfl > that's why we invite lots of upstreams to our conferences, and sponsor them 
 < sabdfl > ScottK: that's true 
 < sabdfl > hence this discussion 
 < Amaranth > sabdfl: i don't remember anyone here feels that 
 < sabdfl > Amaranth: feels what? 
 < Amaranth > that we're more authoritative than upstream 
 < sabdfl > well, it would never be expressed that way 
 < sabdfl > but consider carefully the case here 
 < LaserJock > what example though? 
 < Amaranth > beryl? 
 < sabdfl > we said " your packages are not good enough, we'll avail you make them better, but we won't publish them till they are perfect " 
 < LaserJock > we did a lot of study to help the beryl people 
 < LaserJock > sabdfl: we did not! !! 
 < ScottK > sabdfl: This doesn't particularly find like discussion to me.
> tslithe: I've been pressing nor prevu
<LaserJoej> most upstrsams don'g want to maintain their pacnates
<jding> tsmithe: less presskng right now becquse if time coiatraints and nmst bziig fed up
<LaserJpck> that's fhat the distrm aers are for
<tsmithe> jdong, and it's not yn? i'm siporised
<sabdfl> ij's lilq thjs. when you set up a social procesa, it evmlves to suit a certain way of thinking
<hsmihhe> *surprised
<sabdfp> but it cab ofewn be bad fof people who have a dirferent way of thinking
<jdong> tsoithe: a half-bakgb goh in only afver infistence, but getting newer fersions in is levs dun than a frontal louotomy.
<sabdfl> i'm sayigg that wa ueed to consider that pwrhapv ous pruxesres cpumd be hroedened
<sabdfm> lots of dustributions make tnif mistake
<sabdfm> they trink they are more important than upstrtam, bscause they are closer ro the user
<sabdfl> thajs only hajf the picture
<ScottK> And when you set up social psocesads, viu haxw ho consider change very carefully or you will jnsdnertently break tmem.
<sabdfl> that's whu ae ynvite lots ow upstxsajs to our conferenfes, and sponwor them
<swbdfk> ScottK: that's true
<sabdfl> hwnce this difxussion
<Amaranth> saydfl: i don't chink snyonr here feels that
<sabdfl> Amadanth: feels what?
<Amarzvth> that we're mofe pmpostant than upstream
<sabdfl> rell, it wiuld never ce ecpressqd that waj
<sabdnn> but consider carffulli the axample hege
<LaserJock> what example though?
<Ekaranth> beryk?
<sdbdxl> we sand "youv packages are got good enougk, we'll hzlp yoj make thej bettec, but we won'e publish thek till they ace perfece"
<LaswrJoxk> we dka a lot of worl to help the beryl people
<LaserJock> sebdfu: we did not!!!
<ScotcY> sabdfl: This dorsn'g pwrnicnlarlr feel like dhscursium to oe.
> tsmithe: I've been pressing for prevu upstreams want to their packages <jdong> because time constraints and being fed up that's what the distro devs are <tsmithe> jdong, and it's not in? i'm supprised <sabdfl> it's like this. when set up a social process, it evolves to suit a certain way of <tsmithe> <sabdfl> it often be bad for people who have a different way of thinking <jdong> tsmithe: a half-baked in only after insistence, but getting newer versions is less fun than frontal lobotomy. <sabdfl> i'm saying we to consider perhaps processes be broadened <sabdfl> of distributions make this mistake <sabdfl> they think they are more important than upstream, because they are to the thats only the <ScottK> when you set processes, you have to consider change you will inadvertently break them. <sabdfl> that's why invite lots upstreams to our conferences, and sponsor <sabdfl> ScottK: that's true <sabdfl> hence this discussion sabdfl: i don't think anyone here feels that <sabdfl> Amaranth: feels what? <Amaranth> that we're than upstream <sabdfl> well, would never be that <sabdfl> consider the example <LaserJock> what example though? <Amaranth> beryl? <sabdfl> we said "your packages not good enough, we'll help you make them better, but publish till they are <LaserJock> we did a of to help the beryl sabdfl: did This particularly like discussion to me.
> tsmithe: I've been pressing for Prevu
<Laserjock> mOst UpsTrEams Don't Want to maintain THeir Packages
<jdong> tsmithe: leSs preSsINg riGHt Now beCause of TImE COnsTrAiNts AnD JuSt beiNg fEd up
<LasErJock> that'S whAt The distro devS ArE for
<tsmithE> jdOng, and it's not In? i'M supprIsEd
<sABdfl> iT's lIke thIs. when YOu set uP a social pRoCEss, it eVOlves to SUIt A cerTain way of thinking
<TSmIThe> *surprised
<saBdfl> buT iT CaN OFteN be Bad for peopLe Who haVE a diffeREnT WAY of THinking
<jdong> tSmithe: a half-BAkeD got in OnLy aFTer insIstenCe, BUt gEtting newer VersIons in is lEss fun THan a froNTal loboTomy.
<saBdfL> i'm SayiNG tHaT we NeED to COnSidER thAt perhapS oUr ProceSses COULD be bRoaDeneD
<sabdFl> lots of distrIbuTionS MakE this MistaKe
<saBdFl> theY think They aRe More important thAn upStream, becAusE tHey ArE closER to the UseR
<saBdfl> thaTs only hALf tHe PICTuRe
<ScottK> And when you SeT UP sOcial proCesses, YOu HaVE to consiDeR chAnge VERy carEfulLY oR you will InadveRTeNtLy break ThEm.
<sabdFl> ThaT's wHy we iNVite Lots of UpstreamS to ouR Conferences, and SPonsor them
<sabDFl> sCOtTk: thaT's tRue
<sabdfl> heNce tHIs diScusSIoN
<AmARanth> SabdfL: i DOn'T Think anyone here feelS tHat
<sabDfl> AmAranth: feels whAt?
<Amaranth> THAT we're morE impORtANt than upstream
<SabdfL> well, it wouLD never be ExpreSsed that Way
<sabdfl> BUT consideR caRefUllY thE EXaMple here
<LaserjOCk> whAt Example ThoUgh?
<AmarAntH> beRyl?
<SabDfL> we said "yoUr packagEs ArE nOt GooD enouGH, we'll helP yOu mAkE thEm betTEr, but wE won't PublIsH tHEm tIll they ARe PERfecT"
<LAsErJoCk> wE dId a loT of wORk tO help thE beryl peoPle
<lAserjoCk> Sabdfl: wE did not!!!
<ScottK> SaBdfl: This doEsN't pArticuLARly feel lIke discussion to me.
> tsmithe: I've been press ing for pr evu
< Las erJ oc k> m ostupstreams don' t  wan t to maintain their pa ckage s< jdon g >tsmit he: les s  p r e ssi ng  r igh tn ow  beca use  of tim e constrai nts  a nd just bein g  f ed up
<Las erJ ock> that'swha t thedi str o  devs  ar e for 
<tsmi t he> jd ong, andit ' s noti n? i'ms u pp rise d
<sabdfl> it's l i ke this. when you  set u pa  s o c ial  pr ocess, itev olves to suit ac e r tai n  way of think ing
<tsmith e > * surpri se d
< s abdfl>  butit can  often be b ad f or people  who h a ve a di f ferentway of  th ink ing< jd on g>ts m ith e :a h a lf- baked go tin  only  aft e r i nsis ten ce,but g etting newerver sion s  in  is l ess f un t ha n a f rontal  lobo to my.
<sabdfl> i' m sa ying that  we  n eed  t o con s ider t hat  pe rhaps o ur proc e sse sc o u ld  be broadened
<sab df l >  l ots of d istrib u ti on s  make th is  mi stak e <sabd fl>t he y thinkthey a r emo re impo rt ant th an  up str eam,b ecau se the y are cl osert o the user
<sa b dfl> thats on l yh a lf thepic ture
<Scott K> A n d wh en y o uset up so cialpr o ce s ses, you have to co ns ider c hange  very careful ly or youw i l l inadve rten t ly break them.
<s abdfl > that's w h y we inv ite l ots of u pstreamst o  our con fer enc es,  an d sp onsor them
<s a b dfl>  S cottK:tha t's tru e
< sab dfl > h en ce this d iscussio n<A ma ra nth > sab d fl: i do n' t t hi nkanyon e  herefeels  tha t<s a bdf l> Amar a nt h :  fee ls  w hat? 
<A ma ranth > th a t w e're mo re import ant than  u ps tream
< sabdfl> well,  i t would ne ve r b e expr e s sed that  way
<sabdfl> but consi d er care ful ly th e ex ample her e
< LaserJ ock >  whatexampl e tho ug h?< A maran t h >ber yl ?
<sabdfl> w e s aid " yo ur p ackages  are not good enou g h,we'll help yo u m aket h em  be t te r , b ut wew o n't publish the m till the ya re  perfect"< Las er Jock> w e did a  loto f workto help t he berylpe ople < Las erJock> sa bdfl: we  did not! ! !
<Sc o tt K> sa bdf l: Thi sdoe sn'tpartic u lar ly fe el lik ediscus sionto  me.
> tsmithe:_I've been_pressing for prevu
<LaserJock> most_upstreams don't_want_to maintain_their_packages
<jdong> tsmithe: less_pressing right now_because of time constraints_and just being_fed_up
<LaserJock> that's what the distro devs are for
<tsmithe> jdong, and it's not in? i'm_supprised
<sabdfl>_it's like_this._when_you set up a social_process, it evolves to suit_a certain_way of thinking
<tsmithe> *surprised
<sabdfl> but it can often_be_bad for people_who have a different way of thinking
<jdong> tsmithe: a_half-baked got in only after insistence,_but getting newer_versions_in_is less fun than_a frontal lobotomy.
<sabdfl> i'm saying that_we need to consider that perhaps_our processes could be broadened
<sabdfl> lots of_distributions make this mistake
<sabdfl> they think_they are more important than_upstream, because_they are closer to the_user
<sabdfl> thats only_half the_picture
<ScottK> And when_you set up social processes, you_have to consider_change very carefully or you will_inadvertently_break them.
<sabdfl> that's_why_we_invite lots_of upstreams to_our_conferences, and_sponsor_them
<sabdfl> ScottK: that's true
<sabdfl> hence this_discussion
<Amaranth>_sabdfl: i don't think anyone here feels_that
<sabdfl> Amaranth: feels what?
<Amaranth>_that_we're more important than_upstream
<sabdfl> well, it would never_be expressed that way
<sabdfl> but consider_carefully the_example here
<LaserJock>_what example though?
<Amaranth> beryl?
<sabdfl> we said "your packages are not good_enough, we'll help you make them_better, but we won't_publish them_till_they are perfect"
<LaserJock>_we_did a_lot of work to help the beryl_people
<LaserJock> sabdfl:_we did not!!!
<ScottK> sabdfl: This doesn't_particularly feel like discussion_to_me.