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"[2]. 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 > https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2013/03/msg00020.html: > > 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 recent example: http://bugs.debian.org/703258 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? Best wishes, Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CANTw=mmpswcpjier+3aaeatqkecn9nl0tqca+ijqexpwpm_...@mail.gmail.com
