[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Hash: SHA1

Matthew Garrett <mgarrett@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

>> You'll figure out that the timing for this new policy is absolutely
>> perfect; we're a week away from the voting period for the new DPL
>> term. The current DPL can't (and won't, obviously) do anything about
>> it, and the candidates signed the proposal.
> I haven't signed the proposal. I'm undecided on the technical side of

Sorry, I simplified the statement a bit.

> things (I'd rather see a list of the problems that are being solved, and
> a description of how these proposals fix those problems), and I think
> the way the meeting and conclusions were announced was fairly
> disasterous.

That's the very least we can say about it, yes.

>> I should add that the
>> Vancouver meeting was announced at the very last minute, too. And I'm
>> wondering, who paid for the travel expenses ? Did the people involved
>> pay out of their own pocket ? Did the Project pay ? Did somebody else
>> pay the bill ?
> As mentioned in
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/03/msg00015.html , the
> funding came from NUUGF. As far as I know, the project spent no money on
> this.

For once, it was actually documented. I read the announcement quickly
when I received it, and didn't remember that bit. Thanks for pointing


- -- 
 Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <jblache@debian.org> 
 Public key available on <http://www.jblache.org> - KeyID: F5D6 5169 
 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>


Reply to: