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

Re: Proposal for public announcement for the next release update



Martin Schulze <joey@infodrom.org> writes:
> Andreas Barth wrote:
>> Second, though I really welcome more announcements about the release of
>> Etch, please wait until you get an ok from a release team member,
> I would have, if you and Marc wouldn't have whined so much before and
> gotton onto my nerves.  That left me with the impression that this
> issue is so pressing that I must not delay it any further and send it
> out as soon as I consider it suitable.

No, that's completly wrong. I explicitly informed you that after
delaying it for 5 days, you wouldn't need to bother at all. [1]
The point of the press release was that we wanted to avoid press people
to get a wrong impression from the release update on dda (like in the
past). After most news sites already had an article about this, the
posting to d-announce was completly unneeded from our point of view.

Also, by not explaining what was wrong with our press release, we have
no idea how to make it better the next time.

Sorry, but I'm simply disappointed that you seem to believe that input
From other people can be ignored.

Marc

Footnotes: 
[1]  Last Thursday, in #debian.de@OFTC
-- 
BOFH #27:
radiosity depletion

Attachment: pgpHubdhPs3ng.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: