1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. LINUX.DEBIAN.MAINT.DPKG

  • dpkg.org site

    From Guillem Jover@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jun 7 17:50:01 2023
    Hi,

    Sigh. It seems the dpkg.org domain is being used now as a tool in the
    continued harassment campaign.

    The domain used to be handled by debconf.org after it got transferred
    by the previous owner. I'm not sure whether it was previously handled
    by Brendan (or perhaps just the site) after Scott and previously by
    Wichert. I'm not sure whether Ian registered it initially, or whether
    that was Wichert? (This part is all fuzzy to me.)

    In any case, in 2015, while revamping the dpkg.org site, it was suggested
    that DSA could perhaps replace debconf.org admins for DNS handling and
    hosting, so I requested the move. Joerg can confirm here and probably
    fill in the blanks in case I misremember (there should be an RT ticket).

    I don't see why there should any need, but if, as it looks, this is
    being used as yet another tool of harassment, then perhaps and
    unfortunately it is worth considering moving the domain to another
    organization (and certainly not me directly to avoid SPOF, etc). :/

    Thanks,
    Guillem

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jonathan Carter@21:1/5 to Guillem Jover on Thu Jun 8 20:10:01 2023
    Hey Guillem

    On 2023/06/07 17:42, Guillem Jover wrote:
    Sigh. It seems the dpkg.org domain is being used now as a tool in the continued harassment campaign.

    I'm sorry to be a bit ignorant about this, I've possibly been out of the
    loop somewhere, so could you please give me the details on what's
    happening with dpkg.org and how (and who?) is using this to harass you?

    The only thing I noticed was Ansgar asking yesterday who owns the
    dpkg.org domain, but honestly before that question was asked, I wouldn't
    even be able to confidently answer whether it exists, so I'm not at all
    aware of any actions or events around that domain recently. So the more
    details you could give, the better.

    thanks,

    -Jonathan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Guillem Jover@21:1/5 to Jonathan Carter on Fri Jun 9 03:50:01 2023
    Hi!

    On Thu, 2023-06-08 at 19:48:25 +0200, Jonathan Carter wrote:
    On 2023/06/07 17:42, Guillem Jover wrote:
    Sigh. It seems the dpkg.org domain is being used now as a tool in the continued harassment campaign.

    I'm sorry to be a bit ignorant about this, I've possibly been out of the
    loop somewhere, so could you please give me the details on what's happening with dpkg.org and how (and who?) is using this to harass you?

    Replied off-list to fill in some context.

    Thanks,
    Guillem

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Philipp Kern@21:1/5 to Jonathan Carter on Fri Jun 9 13:50:01 2023
    On 2023-06-08 19:48, Jonathan Carter wrote:
    On 2023/06/07 17:42, Guillem Jover wrote:
    Sigh. It seems the dpkg.org domain is being used now as a tool in the
    continued harassment campaign.

    I'm sorry to be a bit ignorant about this, I've possibly been out of
    the loop somewhere, so could you please give me the details on what's happening with dpkg.org and how (and who?) is using this to harass you?

    The only thing I noticed was Ansgar asking yesterday who owns the
    dpkg.org domain, but honestly before that question was asked, I
    wouldn't even be able to confidently answer whether it exists, so I'm
    not at all aware of any actions or events around that domain recently.
    So the more details you could give, the better.

    Presumably https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2023/06/msg00001.html - paraphrasing "Debian is the upstream, because we own the domain, so the
    TC can decide about behavior of dpkg".

    Kind regards
    Philipp Kern

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ian Jackson@21:1/5 to Philipp Kern on Fri Jun 9 18:40:01 2023
    Philipp Kern writes ("Re: dpkg.org site"):
    Presumably https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2023/06/msg00001.html - paraphrasing "Debian is the upstream, because we own the domain, so the
    TC can decide about behavior of dpkg".

    (For the avoidance of doubt, I'm addressing the argument you
    paraphrase, not your own message.)

    I think this kind of argument is not very helpful.

    I don't think there is any need, from Debian's point of view, to fight
    that particular battle with Guillem. What Debian needs to care about
    is the behaviour of the version of dpkg in Debian. We routinely patch
    things (including removing warnings we disagree with).

    So declaring that "Debian is upstream" and fighting Guillem on that
    basis is entirely unnecessary. And it is also quite unpleasant.

    Additionally IMO it would be best if dpkg.org wasn't used as a weapon
    in this dispute. Right now dpkg.org doesn't say anything about this
    dispute. We could just keep it that way. That would avoid
    unnecessary drama.

    Ian.

    --
    Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.

    Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk,
    that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)