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

Re: -= PROPOSAL =- Release sarge with amd64

On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 04:01:36AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:54:26AM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 12:48:07AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 10:19:19PM +0200, Ingo Juergensmann wrote:
> > > > Even a fresh DD, who has been a NM last year, stated that he won't comment
> > > > publically against Mr. Troup, because he feared that his Approval would be
> > > > delayed then. Funny enough he obviously changed his mind after he became a
> > > > DD. Well, in Germany there is a word for those kind of people: "Wendehals"
> > > 
> > > I wonder why the NM queue is not handled in FIFO mode.
> > 
> > Because that can't work; it would mean one unresponsive NM could jam the
> > queue. I hope you're not advocating that?
> As you can guess by the context, I was referring to the DAM approval part.

That doesn't change anything about what I said (except that the example
is no longer valid). The DAM approval state is not simply an
administrative procedure; the DAM reviews all applications, and it is he
who finally allows or rejects an application, because he is the only
official delegate in the NM procedure. Although rare, rejections at the
DAM stage do happen -- ask Goswin von Brederlow, for example.

     smog  |   bricks
 AIR  --  mud  -- FIRE
soda water |   tequila
 -- with thanks to fortune

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: