Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
[Sven Luther]
> No, he is not, as far as i am concerned, unless he presents his
> apologies first.
For what? Commenting on your wast amount of email posted the last few
days, and his suggestion that the amount of email could make the
ftpmasters delete mails by mistake? I can not really believe that is
your problem, so please enlighten me.
> No, that is not acceptable, and probably not the right reason for
> this. Until evidence proves otherwise, it is just because they don't
> care to read those emails, and that that email address is simply
> forwarded to /dev/null.
I didn't say it was acceptable. I tried to put it in perspective.
I'm well aware of at least some of the communication issues with the
ftpmasters, but truly believe these problems are because the
ftpmasters are overworked, not because they are evil. And I believe
this even though one of the ftpmasters told me on IRC to stop wasting
his time when I wanted to discuss making the list of packages in NEW
public. I put it on the account of misjudgement during stress, not
evil will.
I suspect you would be better off if you accepted that misjudgement
and mistakes happen also for the ftpmasters. After all, your emails
haven't been the perfect examples of rational and clear speek either
(though not as hostile as others on the list. :). I do not hold that
against you, and wish you didn't hold such miscommunications and and
misjudgements against the other volunteers in Debian.
> That would be a solution. But then are the ftp-masters ready to get
> the problems they receive publicly visible ?
I didn't propose to make it all public. request-tracker is capable of
fine grained access control.
> No, a professional attitude would have them reply to the people they
> are working with.
Again, I agree that the ftpmaster role should reply to all requests.
But if the volunteers filling this role are very busy, it does not
help to shout at them and send even more email. A different solution
must be found, and I hope and believe we are on our way to a solution
to the problems the project is facing.
> but this have become the norm these past couple month, and Steve's
> 'proposal' was the last straw.
I guess I do not read the proposal the way you read it. I read it as
a document describing the problems the release team and the ftpmaster
experiences with the release process, and their ideas on how to
improve the situation. But first and formost, I read the proposal as
a good step forward for the release of sarge. After all, the ideas
for reorganizing the process for etch wasn't the most important part
of the "vancouver" announcement. The most important part was that the
release managers and the ftpmasters are coordinated in their work to
release Sarge.
Since the meeting 189 packages have been processed from the NEW queue.
I believe this is the result of the meeting, where the ftpmasters was
able to meet with prospective ftpmaster assistant. I also believe the
increased effort to release sarge is a result of this meeting.
Well, this email is already getting fairly long. Enough hot air from
me this time, I believe.
I am truly sorry for loosing you. You have done a good job helping
Debian progress the state of free software, and it is sad that you
decide to throw in the towel because of hard language from a fellow
Debian volunteer. :(
Reply to: