Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
> I do not understand why the Nybbles team mixed their good news about
> sarge with their foreseeably controversial plans or proposal for etch.
This may have been a strategical error, yes.
For me, the Vancouver meeting goal was obviously the sarge release and
IMHO, they achieved their goal very well.
My interpretation is that doing so, interesting ideas cam to float
around and were formalized enough for the "post-sarge" plans to be
announced.
We should be realistic : this meeting was a good opportunity of
getting together what we can call "key people" (no offense intended at
all...far from this) and thus a good opportunity for these key people
to make proposals.
OK, experience shows that they should probably have separated the
things about sarge release and the things about post-sarge
ideas/plans/whatever, as everyone knows that *any* proposal made in
Debian triggers a counterproductive flamew^W endless discussion.
I suppose there were reasons for this and I grant the Vancouver
meeting people enough respect for having good reasons...even if this
ends up in being a strategical error.
My personal concern now is avoiding to "throw out the baby with the
bath's water" as we say in French.
OK, the architecture handling is controversial. Fine...this will
probably delay etch more than we would like. But could we please focus
on releasing sarge first? By focus, I also mean avoidn wasting
valuable DD time to endless discussions (no real human can read this
thread already), flamewars and personal attacks (I'm quite saddened by
Julien's hard attacks and proposal to do the Revolution).
This thread obviously shows that some more real life discussions are
needed about post-sarge plans and I don't doubt that involved people
will welcome more contributions and start thinking again.
This is very likely to be my last contribution to this thread....
except in sub-threads dealing with sarge release.
Reply to: