Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Christian Perrier <email@example.com> wrote:
> 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).
Christian, I am quite disappointed to read this.
Please realize that the so-called proposal is nothing else than a
plan, that would be enforced if this thread wasn't taking place.
It has absolutely nothing to do with what has been discussed
previously. The authors are the same who said repeteadly that the
number of architectures wasn't reponsible for the sarge delay.
Now, apply the same kind of plan to i18n/l10n. You'd probably feel
Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer - <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Public key available on <http://www.jblache.org> - KeyID: F5D6 5169
GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----