On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 08:26:41AM -0400, Thomas Hood wrote: > On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 02:30, Adam Heath wrote: > > * Were was this discussed on this mailing list? All such mass filings > > should be discussed here first, before being filed. Not after. > You're right. I did post a question about this earlier in the > day yesterday, but I didn't wait long enough for replies. I > guess the problem was that I didn't see how one could object to > someone reporting clear policy violations, especially in light of > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/debian-devel-200204/msg02035.html If no one replies, there's been no discussion. If there's no discussion, you have nothing by which to measure consensus, and mass bugfilings MUST NOT be carried out. > I'm not sure why you are so upset (as you seem to be). Over the past > month we have closed about 30 of the 70 "RC" bugs. At that rate woody > won't be out for another month, so there is still time to fix > small "serious" bugs (if we think they're worth fixing). If you > say that many of the remaining 45 "RC" bugs are ignored, then that's > fine --- ignore these too. In other words, you're saying that because the release has been slow in coming, and because /you/ judge that there has not been significant progress in closing out remaining RC bugs, you have no qualms about undermining the release process by introducing a large number of RC bugs two days before the scheduled release. I think you should meditate on the virtues of consensus and collaboration. Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpaD6AgWGO1q.pgp
Description: PGP signature