On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:08:01 -0700 (PDT) "Alec Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Breaking the tree, and thus end user systems, is not an acceptable > > way of getting people to fix things. It doesn't make any difference > > to developers who haven't fixed their packages, only to users. > > It's acceptable to me. I'd rather see us make progress than postpone > changes for months while devs bicker about changes to be made. That > would not be the case if say, people had the balls to just fix things > in the tree. However we have this fun system where you have to > incessantly contact the maintainer in order to get anything done lest > they cry and moan and run to the council because 'you touched their > precious package'.
Well, if it's reached the "take drastic action" stage (which, let's face it, it has at this point), why not go and fix the tree? It's a better solution than breaking it, and anyone who moans now isn't going to get any sympathy from anyone. Get QA to issue an official proclamation first if you'd like to legitimise it completely -- the Council has already given them authority to do that... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
