Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 01:24:32PM +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > > > Actually, I believe you'll find that that wasn't even put forward as a > > > metric for the experiment.
I didn't write that. > > In your own words, the experiment was to allocate sufficient funds so > > that Steve Langasek and Andreas Barth can dedicate a month each to > > getting etch out on time (and Mon 4 Dec 06 was already given as the > > release date). > > If you consider that to be the "success condition", it seems it was > already a "success" -- that amount of funds was allocated, for exactly > that purpose. It didn't fulfil that condition: Etch didn't release on Mon 4 Dec 06 - or is the next chunk of funding going to repairing the time machine that was broken next week? > > I think the experiment has even failed to provide useful information > > it could have, partly due to the refusal to take or request any > > recognisable measurements. Any future DPL funding initiative could be [...] > > Given this isn't a "DPL" funding initiative, I think you're way off base. The above proposal was first posted by the DPL = DPL initiated it = it was a DPL initiative. No amount of moving it between shells, moving it away from developer control, will change that. > > Further, it's cynical and unrealistic to demand that those unhappy > > with the experiment to fulfil the DPL's wishlist at this busiest time > > of year for festivals and so on. [...] > > You are, of course, free to do what you want, and you don't need to come > up with any excuses for that. However, it seemed that it was being set up to be interpreted as cynicism or other nonsense by the dunc-tank's advocates if the bleeding obvious (IT'S THE FESTIVE SEASON) wasn't pointed out. > > I hope that > > reporters are smart enough to recognise both that demand and the > > refusal to report yet as the politicking of a DPL trying to hide the > > negatives of his decisions. > > If this were politicking, what makes you think that I'm not suggesting > the very thing I'm worried most about, safe in the knowledge that yourself > and others will say "oh, if aj suggested it, it must be an evil, political > idea and I shall do the exact opposite"? I don't think that, because there can be no *knowledge* that I would say that falsehood. I remember that aj has attacked a proposal merely because it involved me, but I don't do the same in reverse. I look at proposals on their merits, even those who I've disagreed with in the past. My memory probably isn't good enough to "keep score" like that anyway. For example, I supported terminating this DPLship early because I think the DPL decisions to date were mostly poor (as I explained at the time), not as a personal attack against aj. I don't know and have never met aj socially, and I don't even remember any real-time messaging interactions. Maybe the next proposal will be brilliant - we'll see when it comes - but the dunc-tank sucks in so many ways. Hope that explains, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]