Re: So what?
Am Donnerstag, den 30.07.2009, 23:17 +1000 schrieb Ben Finney:
> "Francesco P. Lovergine" <email@example.com> writes:
> > - Next time, any team that would take a decision which impacts the
> > whole project have to be fair and consult the project as a whole,
> > before unilateral actions. That's appropriate even if the team is
> > acting within its own limits of decision making, as in this case. This
> > appears as responsible and appropriate to the most. This is a general
> > recommendation and does not require comments, probably.
> Thank you for saying it, since it does seem to get overlooked too often
> (not only on this issue).
Anyone remembers the `Kicking off Squeeze' mail to d-d-a? 
Here some quotes from it:
The main aim of the Release Team is to help the Project deliver a
release the developers will be proud of, with a development process
they’ll find satisfactory, and with a balanced timeline that will
meet the needs of developers and end-users.
So, here’s our deal for the Squeeze development cycle, during which we
* actively seek and act upon feedback and criticism from the
developers, in order to prevent past mistakes from happening
again, and improve the interaction between the RT and the rest of
* engage in discussions with the developers at large, as well as
particular groups and teams, to get a clear picture of what their
concerns, objectives and proposed solutions are.
What I understand from following this topic about it, this isn't exactly
the truth with the new squeeze release cycle.
I don't know if it's good or not to have a fixed freeze date synced with
Ubuntu, but I agree that the way this was decided and communicated to
the developers wasn't that great.
Proud Debian Maintainer