Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64
tb@becket.net (Thomas Bushnell, BSG) writes:
> Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> writes:
>
>> Getting that information or getting amd64 added to sid would be the
>> point of the revised GR. It would have to be worded in a way that
>> forces ftp-master to add amd64 in a reasonable timeframe unless he can
>> give reasons not to.
>
> It is the Project Leader's job to supervise his Delegates (including
> the ftp-master). So if you are complaining that the ftp-master is
> derelict, I want to hear what he says. If you think the Project
> Leader is not doing a sufficient job at supervising the Delegate, then
> I want to hear what he has to say. But it is, in the first instance,
> for the Project Leader to ask the Delegate, and to give him
> deadlines.
Yes, very reasonable. So (after asking the DPL and him rejecting) the
GR should be amended to "The Debian developers overturn the decision
of the DPL not to set a deadline for deciding the amd64 inclusion in
sid for ftp-master"?
Worst case scenario: Lets say that wins (1 month delay) and a deadline
is set and passes (another month delay) and the ftp-master team is not
replaced (another month waiting for the DPL to do that) then we can
make a GR forcing the replacement (another month) and get a new team
in (another month to find that team) and get amd64 added to sid.
That makes 5 month delay just through inaction for something the great
majority of developers wants? Please don't let it come to that.
> This is the kind of thing you need in any GR long before I am willing
> to agree to it.
>
> You have lept to the GR strategy, failing to realize that the GR
> strategy should *presume* that you have done this work.
I haven't. Someone else did and it was not coordinated on the
debian-amd64 mailinglist (which it should have). Could have been
discussed on irc while I was absent there but I doubt it.
>> It would also have to be worded in a way that gets the DPL to
>> disappoint the ftp-master team and to replace it with one that will
>> act.
>
> Have you already asked the DPL to do this? What was his response?
> Don't you think that should be a first step before we should approve a
> GR?
Well, we have (asked him to intervene) and he is working on it. See
the last mail from him for the details of his now increased efforts
to resolve it.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: