Re: Release-critical bugs, and #97671
Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Release-critical bugs, and #97671"):
> I therefore hereby propose the following resolution of the Technical
(Full resolution below.)
No-one has commented to say they object to us punting on this one, so
I hereby call for a vote on the resolution I proposed on Monday. If
anyone votes against, or proposes an amendment, I'll probably withdraw
the resolution so we can talk about it.
We note that
* This dispute contains both technical and process (ie political)
elements; however, it has not been possible to identify a clear
technical dispute which as at the heart of the problem.
* The heart of the problem seems to be a disagreement over the proper
use of various tagging features of the bug tracking system. This
is a process matter.
* We do not feel that this decision is within our normal remit; the
constitution suggests that the project leader and delegates would
* The bug system administrators would seem to be the most relevant
* We are not sufficiently united in our opinions that we feel that
the Committee should issue any formal advice or opinion.
* Should a disputed technical question be raised, we would be happy
to answer it.
We therefore recommend that
* The bug system administrators and/or the project leader or some
other delegates appointed by the project leader decide on the
proper use of the bug system features.
Ian Jackson, at home. Local/personal: firstname.lastname@example.org
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org