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

Re: Dunk-Tank and the DD strike



Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl>:
> 
>  Bill wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-14-03 at 10:45 -0400, Celejar wrote:
> >> What is this all about? I've been following d-u pretty closely
> >> recently, and I haven't seen much DT discussion here.
> > 
> > Ideally, bridging the gap. 
> > 
> > Not that I've any inflated sense of my own importance, or 
> > ability to resolve the problem, but perhaps the most important
> > thing Anthony Towns can do _before_ the election is to get the 
> > release process back on track.

I thought it was on track.

> > Most of us have been very patient, and have faith that etch will
> > happen when it's ready. But, if the strike drags on into the new
> > leaders term, then it's harmful. 

Strike?  I've heard of DDs withholding their efforts, but strike?

> > The right thing to do is to get back on track now.
> > 
> > DU is perhaps the right place to start such a process: to guage
> 
>  Personally, I would prefer not to have a dunk-tank flame war showing up
>  in d-u, as it's a dev issue, not a user one.

ACK.

>  I'm sure the user community is anxiously awaiting Etch, but the
>  consensus here is AFAIK, it'll be ready when it's ready and we will
>  wait.

ACK.

I don't get the DT kafuffle.  It was an experiment attempting to
improve $SOMETHING.  What's the data say of the results?  Experiments
are always worth trying, aren't they (assuming willing subjects /
participants)?

If the DDs hate it, they know what to do.  If it had benefits, ditto.
Determine what those are, handle it, and move on, yes?

[I'm not attempting to minimize the DDs difficulty in handling this
issue.  I'll readily admit its complexities are beyond me.]
-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)    http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling          Linux Counter #80292
- -    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.html    Please, don't Cc: me.
       Spammers! http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling/emails.html



Reply to: