On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:26:06PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > absolutly. I still dont think it was right to have this decission in private,
> > but at least announcing it earlier would have been better.
> >
> > (I do think having the decission in private was neccessary because else the
> > decission would not have been made that way. But I might be wrong on that.)
> As I said in some other mail... I was part of the deciding team
> several times. We have often had non-official side channels to discuss
> bits we see, even to do the casual wry comments to the close friends
> we interactede with in the process we would not make in the
> open. There has always been some level of private communication around
> the decision.
what's your point? there's always *some* private discussion everywhere.
that's totally ok, normal, unavoidable and doesn't do any harm.
but having the *decision* and the/a discussion leading to it, should *not* happen
on private, non archived channels. IMNSHO.
> > even if they were not ready at the 2nd review meeting, I dont understand why you
> > dont have a 3rd review meeting and instead now think it's need to decide this
> > in private again.
> >
> > can you explain?
>
> Because after the 2nd review, we asked all the teams to update some
> bits. They pushed forwards. Now the decision is nearly final (it burns
> my fingers and I'd love to announce it, I guess we will communicate it
> in this week). But we have to write it as a joint thing, taking care
> of several bits in the process.
>
> There is no point anymore in having a round 3. It would just waste
> everybody's time.
you might call it wasting everybodys time. i'd call it a transparent decision.
(and of course there are non transparent decisions in Debian too, eg like how
the release team chooses the release names. but those are very different in
scope and impact, and the general direction is also very clear: a toy story name.)
--
cheers,
Holger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C
In Europe there are people prosecuted by courts because they saved other people
from drowning in the Mediterranean Sea. That is almost as absurd as if there
were people being prosecuted because they save humans from drowning in the sea.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature