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

Re: Invite to join the Release Team

Clint Adams wrote:
> [Adding and M-F-T-ing -project]
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 10:04:58AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> I want to point out that Luk's mail was not in any way discussed in the
>> release team. I think it is horrible.
>> I welcome everyone to critize the release team. I would prefer help, of
>> course, but on the other hand, I do understand that people can see a
>> problem, but don't have the time to fix. It would be nice if such
>> criticism would be sent directly to the release team, and bluntly
>> point out what the problem is, as that makes it easier to work on the
>> issue.
> Okay, so when there is a mysterious release team meeting in Cambridge,
> and there is no discussion or planning of it on debian-release, or
> #debian-release, or anywhere else public that I can see, and there is
> zero evidence that it was planned or happened on official channels,
> and at least two of the participants (or whom I assume were participants)
> tell me that transparency is either completely unimportant or
> low-priority, and the DPL-2IC team seems to favor the opposite of
> transparency, how is one supposed to know about this meeting in
> time to complain about it?  How and why should one complain to the
> release team directly?

Transparency can be nice, though there is zero to nothing discussed
about the release meeting at Cambridge because it was unclear what was
agreed on if anything and it lasted till quite some months and meetings
later before it started to make any sense.

When Dato left, I had to suddenly give the talk at DebConf and I was not
ready to communicate, though the press wanted to send something out.
There was a major misunderstanding which was probably my fault, though
nothing was the same again afterwards.

Now I took a VAC to be able to get some rest and think things over and
the only things I see when I come back are complaints directed to my
person (and the Release Team) regarding python2.6 and communication.

The complaints may very well be valid, though the way they are out are
very much not IMHO.

The whole thing about secrecy is exagerated AFAICS as there just is not
much to tell. The reason these things mostly remain private is that
there is not much to tell and making things public without the consent
of everyone involved is not done.



Reply to: