I vote BCFA. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:06:57PM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > I'd like to call for votes to resolve #688772 with the following > options, with F as further discussion. Both options A and B require a > 3:1 majority, as they overrule the gnome maintainers; Option C does > not. > === START === > > 1. The TC notes the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to > implement the TC decision in #681834 by: > (a) softening the dependency in the gnome-core metapackage > from Depends to Recommends, as required > (b) adding a new dependency in the gnome metapackage, > as a Depends. (In squeeze, this is where the dependency > was, but it was a Recommends.) > > 2. Our intent, as stated in the rationale section of our previous > decision (#681834, paras 3 and 5), is that squeeze users who have > gnome installed but not network-manager do not find that > network-manager becomes installed when they upgrade to wheezy. > > 3. A Recommends from gnome to network-manager-gnome would serve no > purpose in wheezy as gnome Depends on gnome-core which already > Recommends network-manager-gnome. > > Therefore > > A 4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a > A dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency > A should be removed for the release of wheezy. > A > A 5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so > A that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. > A > A 6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome > A users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing > A it. > > > B 4. We overrule the decision of the meta-gnome maintainers to add a > B dependency from gnome to network-manager-gnome; this dependency > B should be removed. If in the opinion of the NM maintainer (and > B before the release of wheezy the Chair of the Technical Committee > B or an individual delegated by the Chair in consultation with the > B Release Team) the concerns raised in ยง4 of the CTTE decision > B #681834 have been addressed through technical means (e.g. by > B preventing the starting of NM as discussed in #688772), the > B meta-gnome maintainers may freely adjust the dependencies as > B usual. > B > B Specifically, valid bugs where existing valid network > B configurations are broken by the automatic, required installation > B on system upgrade of packages not previously installed which > B perform network configuration on should have severity serious. > B > B 5. We request that the Release Team unblock update(s) to meta-gnome so > B that our decisions may be implemented in wheezy. > B > B 6. We request that a release note is created explaining that gnome > B users who do not currently have NM installed consider installing > B it. > > C 4. After further discussion, we understand that reintroducing > C network-manager on upgrade was part of the intent, due to both > C substantial improvements in network-manager and tighter integration of > C network-manager with the GNOME desktop in wheezy. Since the gnome > C metapackage has historically been more aggressive at pulling in > C additional packages, we believe the move of the dependency from > C gnome-core to gnome is an acceptable compromise that was not raised > C during the previous discussion. Users who want to remove > C network-manager can still use the gnome-core metapackage to get the > C basic GNOME desktop functionality. > C > C We recommend that this upgrade behavior for users of the gnome > C metapackage be documented in the release notes. > > === STOP ===
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
