Re: NEW handling: About rejects, and kernels
Petter Reinholdtsen <pere@hungry.com> wrote:
> [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. :(
--
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer
Reply to: