Re: [PATCH] Revert Abortion joke removal.

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>]

On May  7, 2018, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:

> It will be hard to make progress with multiple issues at the same time.

It's not multiple issues.

> However, you go against the objections of at least 3 of your fellow
> GNU project maintainers.

Show me where they objected to MY proposal.

I don't care if they objected to something else in the larger debate.
The larger debate isn't over yet, so whatever their opinion is matters
once consensus is reached for the larger debate.  People's opinions
regarding a debate are supposed to affect the state *after* the debate,
not *during* it.  Right?  Or are you suggesting we should change the
rules so as to say that, if enough people shout loud enough or sneak the
patch in early enough, they get to change the initial conditions of the
debated issue in their favor?

>> This is also in line with the community-agreed procedures.

> No. Is not in line. You have ignored the community principles and checked
> in the patch against the objections of fellow GNU package maintainers.
 
I have not.  Again, show me ANY objections to MY proposal, posted before
I pushed the reversal, or before the email in which I said I was doing
so.

>> It is obvious that we didn't have consensus on a decision to install
>> that patch, since both sides are still arguing over it.

> No. At the time the patch had consensus.

No, it only seemed to have consensus, because of a regrettable mistake
on the committer's part, and another of mine (I decided to ask RMS
*before* raising my objection).  I objected, and RMS objected.  He
hadn't been given a chance to speak yet.  That's not consensus, that's
sneaking stuff in.

> The reversal does not.

The restoration of the initial status quo to unbias the discussion was
not opposed by anyone, if it was even read.

> It's OK though as a GNU package maintainer you do not need to follow
> any of these rules.

Thank you for that concession, but it's not necessary.  I'm perfectly in
line with the consensus rules, regardless of how others might prefer to
confess to cheating in the consensus rules than to admitting that they
did not respond to my proposal.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist|Red Hat Brasil GNU Toolchain Engineer