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

Re: Debian Etch Stable.

Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 01:24:32PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > Actually, I believe you'll find that that wasn't even put forward as a
> > > metric for the experiment.

I didn't write that.

> > In your own words, the experiment was to allocate sufficient funds so
> > that Steve Langasek and Andreas Barth can dedicate a month each to
> > getting etch out on time (and Mon 4 Dec 06 was already given as the
> > release date).
> If you consider that to be the "success condition", it seems it was
> already a "success" -- that amount of funds was allocated, for exactly
> that purpose.

It didn't fulfil that condition: Etch didn't release on Mon 4 Dec 06 -
or is the next chunk of funding going to repairing the time machine
that was broken next week?

> > I think the experiment has even failed to provide useful information
> > it could have, partly due to the refusal to take or request any
> > recognisable measurements.  Any future DPL funding initiative could be [...]
> Given this isn't a "DPL" funding initiative, I think you're way off base.

The above proposal was first posted by the DPL = DPL initiated it = it
was a DPL initiative.  No amount of moving it between shells, moving
it away from developer control, will change that.

> > Further, it's cynical and unrealistic to demand that those unhappy
> > with the experiment to fulfil the DPL's wishlist at this busiest time
> > of year for festivals and so on.  [...]
> You are, of course, free to do what you want, and you don't need to come
> up with any excuses for that.

However, it seemed that it was being set up to be interpreted as
cynicism or other nonsense by the dunc-tank's advocates if the
bleeding obvious (IT'S THE FESTIVE SEASON) wasn't pointed out.

> > I hope that
> > reporters are smart enough to recognise both that demand and the
> > refusal to report yet as the politicking of a DPL trying to hide the
> > negatives of his decisions.
> If this were politicking, what makes you think that I'm not suggesting
> the very thing I'm worried most about, safe in the knowledge that yourself
> and others will say "oh, if aj suggested it, it must be an evil, political
> idea and I shall do the exact opposite"?

I don't think that, because there can be no *knowledge* that I would
say that falsehood.

I remember that aj has attacked a proposal merely because it involved
me, but I don't do the same in reverse.  I look at proposals on their
merits, even those who I've disagreed with in the past.  My memory
probably isn't good enough to "keep score" like that anyway.  For
example, I supported terminating this DPLship early because I think
the DPL decisions to date were mostly poor (as I explained at the
time), not as a personal attack against aj.

I don't know and have never met aj socially, and I don't even remember
any real-time messaging interactions.  Maybe the next proposal will be
brilliant - we'll see when it comes - but the dunc-tank sucks in so
many ways.

Hope that explains,
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

Reply to: