Re: Bits from the Release Team - Kicking off Wheezy
Hi Neil,
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:48:24PM +0100, Neil McGovern wrote:
> Indeed. Personally, I believe it would also be unreasonable to ask DDs,
> and indeed the release, security, and FTP teams to support testing and
> rolling. Especially before it has been proven to be negligible extra
> effort.
Indeed. I'd hope that we could put something together that people would
*want* to adopt. I totally get that the RM team is skeptical.
> A complete aside: I have yet to see DEPs being anything but a structured
> way to bikeshed. However, if you wish to go down this route, feel free.
> This does bring me full circle back to the start of my mail - if you
> want to push this, that's fine. But please don't try and make extra work
> for others.
While just about any technical discussion on -devel will have its tangents
and its non sequitors, I think we *have* had some good stuff come out of the
DEP's, so I disagree there. For example, DEP-3 and DEP-5 have (indeed,
after quite a bit of bikeshedding) resulted in some nice pseudo-standards
that are gaining increasing traction/usage.
And even the DEP's that are REJECTED will stand as documentation of
something that someone tried once, and maybe didn't work out for some
reason, and could serve as a basis for ideas later on, which is an
order of magnitude better than an infrequently recurring ML thread
where everyone forgots all the gotchas and details from the last time
it was discussed n months ago.
sean
Reply to: