Re: All candidates: Development and technical issues and challenges
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:14 AM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> Maybe we could discriminate on the package's priorities. For example,
>> about a third of the 49 packages *really* blocking the release (not
>> waiting for a transition) are from "extra". Only 5 bugs affect
>> required, important or standard packages. We could focus on those and
>> tell the "extra packages" to hurry up or be shipped with packages that
>> will need to be fixed in a point release... or simply removed.
> That's something I already commented on in
> Another possible area of improvement is the focusing on the more
> important RC bugs. One way to achieve that would be to remove as many
> leaf/not-so-popular packages as possible at the start of the freeze.
> If they get fixed, they could get back in.
Even the suggestion of a testing removal can evoke negative feelings
for those affected (sometimes from those on the sidelines too). A
Do you have any thoughts on addressing the social aspect of this
approach? In actuality, a testing removal is really not a big deal
since the package can come right back once the RC bug is fixed. Even
so, some see removals as a kind of judgement on themselves as
maintainer. What can be said or done to qualm the fear and anxiety?