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

Re: Canonical and Debian

On Sun, Jun 05, 2005 at 07:15:49PM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > All the teams that are occasionally accused of cabalistic
> > characteristics are composed of a diverse group of DD's, and I dare say
> > that they are composed of a group of DD's that simply have shown genuine
> > interest and constructive contributions to the team's goal at hand. In
> > other words, those teams consist of those doing the work. I'll be the
> > first to admit that indeed the admittance to such teams might be a bit
> > obscure to those not following closely what's happening, but if
> > someone's genuinly interested in contributing to any particular task,
> > there's always a lot to do also for relatively outsiders, and that's the
> > way you can show competence and make a step towards joining.

> If you want to contribute to GNOME packaging, you know what to do:
> contribute enough patches and uploads, and you'll end up having a
> subversion access very quickly. This is the case for most maintenance
> teams in the project, and I doubt you can say they have cabalistic
> characteristics.

> Now, please tell me what I can do so that all architectures in sarge are
> supported in etch.

Clone yourself and make yourself a slave to the buildds for 7 or 8
architectures, so that the release team doesn't have to.  Neither the
release team nor the FTP team is interested in being responsible for keeping
all of these architectures afloat.  You can either step up and make sure the
architectures you care about are in good shape for etch, or you can be a
whiny brat expecting everything to be handed to you on a silver platter and
accusing people of being members of a Canonical-controlled cabal when they
do you the courtesy of informing you about their personal priorities for
etch.  Your choice.

Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: