On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 06:30:56PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 05:26:18PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > But if what you're trying to say is that it's not all your fault as > > Release Team, I acknowledge that. Then again, it's a really poor > > excuse to justify missbehaviour because of pre-existing > > missbehaviour somewhere else. > > Well, it is a poor excuse *if* you consider the Release Team to have > full responsibility of everything which is released in Debian. Of course they don't. But if the release-team tags a DFSG-violation "lenny-ignore", then they do have responsibility for setting that tag. The result of that tag is that the known DFSG-violation is willfully accepted into the release. The argument is that the RMs shouldn't have the power to decide that. Nobody is claiming (AFAIK) that the RMs are responsible for things they didn't notice. This is about things they noticed, and actively accepted. > I think it is not the case, they should be held responsible "only" > (again with double quotes, because AFAICT it is not the > simplest/funniest job ever) for their decisions about what migrates > and what doesn't. Right. And (the relevant category in this discussion) what is accepted in the release even though there is an RC bug on it. > The content which migrates is the main responsibility of the > maintainer, then (in case of DFSG violations / illegal stuff) also of > FTP masters. Yes, but in both those cases problems can happen (and stay) because of inactivity. The problem with the final step is that it's active, so we can't say "sorry, we missed that one". I'm not saying that maintainers are always doing the right thing, but they can always claim that they didn't know about it (until a bug is filed). That makes that part of the problem a lot harder to fix. > Can someone explain me why all these threads smell of gratuitous RM > bashing? I hope I didn't take part in that. I'm very happy with the work done by the RMs. But that doesn't mean I want to give them the power to overrule the SC without a GR. Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://a82-93-13-222.adsl.xs4all.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature