Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?)from the Vancouver release team meeting)
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 09:36:38AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: Ola Lundqvist dijo [Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:19:45PM +0100]: And would a larger discussion at debconf'05 not have been more appropriate than handing done a couple of taken decision disguised as proposal ? It is not too late for this yet, but there needs to be a real discussion with real facts, and not just a list of resolution letting 8/11th of the project in the cold. Please take this kind of discussions on debian-devel as it is possible for people not attending on debconf be a part of the discussion. I do believe that Debconf is an ideal place for this - Having 150 of us together might mean having 40 of us interested in joining this discussion, brainstorming (and shouting at each other) for ~2hr instead of over 600 messages, and coming up with something similar to the Vancouver stuff - a summary of the points reached, not a firm decision... But a summary with more adherents. And more people convinced by the release and ftp teams on what and why (or people in those teams convinced back, or... whatever :) ) Of course, if you cannot make it to Debconf, you will know about the discussion results. In fact, Debconf plans to capture audio/video of the sessions at the auditoriums, so you might even participate via IRC. That would be good. I'm probably interested in that. I intended to propose this topic for a round table, but was asked to wait on this by one of the release members, as they were close to announcing the Vancouver stuff... Anyway, I am not formally proposing it, but I do expect it to happen - After all, we will be in HEL ;-) :) Regards, // Ola Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)1451-2244 / 5554-9450 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Ola Lundqvist --- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD | | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?)from the Vancouver release team meeting)
Ola Lundqvist dijo [Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 09:19:45PM +0100]: And would a larger discussion at debconf'05 not have been more appropriate than handing done a couple of taken decision disguised as proposal ? It is not too late for this yet, but there needs to be a real discussion with real facts, and not just a list of resolution letting 8/11th of the project in the cold. Please take this kind of discussions on debian-devel as it is possible for people not attending on debconf be a part of the discussion. I do believe that Debconf is an ideal place for this - Having 150 of us together might mean having 40 of us interested in joining this discussion, brainstorming (and shouting at each other) for ~2hr instead of over 600 messages, and coming up with something similar to the Vancouver stuff - a summary of the points reached, not a firm decision... But a summary with more adherents. And more people convinced by the release and ftp teams on what and why (or people in those teams convinced back, or... whatever :) ) Of course, if you cannot make it to Debconf, you will know about the discussion results. In fact, Debconf plans to capture audio/video of the sessions at the auditoriums, so you might even participate via IRC. I intended to propose this topic for a round table, but was asked to wait on this by one of the release members, as they were close to announcing the Vancouver stuff... Anyway, I am not formally proposing it, but I do expect it to happen - After all, we will be in HEL ;-) Greetings, -- Gunnar Wolf - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - (+52-55)1451-2244 / 5554-9450 PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23 Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
I do not understand why the Nybbles team mixed their good news about sarge with their foreseeably controversial plans or proposal for etch. This may have been a strategical error, yes. For me, the Vancouver meeting goal was obviously the sarge release and IMHO, they achieved their goal very well. My interpretation is that doing so, interesting ideas cam to float around and were formalized enough for the post-sarge plans to be announced. We should be realistic : this meeting was a good opportunity of getting together what we can call key people (no offense intended at all...far from this) and thus a good opportunity for these key people to make proposals. OK, experience shows that they should probably have separated the things about sarge release and the things about post-sarge ideas/plans/whatever, as everyone knows that *any* proposal made in Debian triggers a counterproductive flamew^W endless discussion. I suppose there were reasons for this and I grant the Vancouver meeting people enough respect for having good reasons...even if this ends up in being a strategical error. My personal concern now is avoiding to throw out the baby with the bath's water as we say in French. OK, the architecture handling is controversial. Fine...this will probably delay etch more than we would like. But could we please focus on releasing sarge first? By focus, I also mean avoidn wasting valuable DD time to endless discussions (no real human can read this thread already), flamewars and personal attacks (I'm quite saddened by Julien's hard attacks and proposal to do the Revolution). This thread obviously shows that some more real life discussions are needed about post-sarge plans and I don't doubt that involved people will welcome more contributions and start thinking again. This is very likely to be my last contribution to this thread except in sub-threads dealing with sarge release. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Christian Perrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, the architecture handling is controversial. Fine...this will probably delay etch more than we would like. But could we please focus on releasing sarge first? By focus, I also mean avoidn wasting valuable DD time to endless discussions (no real human can read this thread already), flamewars and personal attacks (I'm quite saddened by Julien's hard attacks and proposal to do the Revolution). Christian, I am quite disappointed to read this. Please realize that the so-called proposal is nothing else than a plan, that would be enforced if this thread wasn't taking place. It has absolutely nothing to do with what has been discussed previously. The authors are the same who said repeteadly that the number of architectures wasn't reponsible for the sarge delay. Now, apply the same kind of plan to i18n/l10n. You'd probably feel insulted too. JB. - -- Julien BLACHE - Debian GNU/Linux Developer - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Public key available on http://www.jblache.org - KeyID: F5D6 5169 GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/ iD8DBQFCNr9LzWFP1/XWUWkRAjPRAKC5fEmhfL31Q+zY2iULvtXLpye5wQCfTA1f v0wMI26pqO/qwvUrgrXrw90= =soNX -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
Julien BLACHE wrote: It has absolutely nothing to do with what has been discussed previously. The authors are the same who said repeteadly that the number of architectures wasn't reponsible for the sarge delay. The above statement is incorrect. If you disagree, you'll need to pull up references. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
Hello On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:43:11AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 05:32:44PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: Frank Küster wrote: I do not understand why the Nybbles team mixed their good news about sarge with their foreseeably controversial plans or proposal for etch. I fear that we will have a huge, long flamewar. And many competent, active people will start coding implementations of alternatives to the Nybbles plan, alternatives that will allow us to make releases also of the SCC/tier-2 arches. I think all this discussion about etch should be delayed until sarge is out. Of course we would need a statement from the Nybbles team that they do not intend to make decicions, and not to settle facts before a thorough discussion has taken place - after the release. The fact that the release team now sees the light at the end of the tunnel for the release of sarge means that now is the time we need to begin planning for etch. Allowing unstable development to pick back up after a release with no clear plan for the next release has been shown time and time again to delay the next release by one to two *years*. The rest follows from that. And would a larger discussion at debconf'05 not have been more appropriate than handing done a couple of taken decision disguised as proposal ? It is not too late for this yet, but there needs to be a real discussion with real facts, and not just a list of resolution letting 8/11th of the project in the cold. Please take this kind of discussions on debian-devel as it is possible for people not attending on debconf be a part of the discussion. Regards, // Ola Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- - Ola Lundqvist --- / [EMAIL PROTECTED] Annebergsslingan 37 \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] 654 65 KARLSTAD | | +46 (0)54-10 14 30 +46 (0)70-332 1551 | | http://www.opal.dhs.org UIN/icq: 4912500 | \ gpg/f.p.: 7090 A92B 18FE 7994 0C36 4FE4 18A1 B1CF 0FE5 3DD9 / --- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
Frank Küster wrote: I do not understand why the Nybbles team mixed their good news about sarge with their foreseeably controversial plans or proposal for etch. I fear that we will have a huge, long flamewar. And many competent, active people will start coding implementations of alternatives to the Nybbles plan, alternatives that will allow us to make releases also of the SCC/tier-2 arches. I think all this discussion about etch should be delayed until sarge is out. Of course we would need a statement from the Nybbles team that they do not intend to make decicions, and not to settle facts before a thorough discussion has taken place - after the release. The fact that the release team now sees the light at the end of the tunnel for the release of sarge means that now is the time we need to begin planning for etch. Allowing unstable development to pick back up after a release with no clear plan for the next release has been shown time and time again to delay the next release by one to two *years*. The rest follows from that. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Release sarge now, or discuss etch issues? (was: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting)
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 05:32:44PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: Frank Küster wrote: I do not understand why the Nybbles team mixed their good news about sarge with their foreseeably controversial plans or proposal for etch. I fear that we will have a huge, long flamewar. And many competent, active people will start coding implementations of alternatives to the Nybbles plan, alternatives that will allow us to make releases also of the SCC/tier-2 arches. I think all this discussion about etch should be delayed until sarge is out. Of course we would need a statement from the Nybbles team that they do not intend to make decicions, and not to settle facts before a thorough discussion has taken place - after the release. The fact that the release team now sees the light at the end of the tunnel for the release of sarge means that now is the time we need to begin planning for etch. Allowing unstable development to pick back up after a release with no clear plan for the next release has been shown time and time again to delay the next release by one to two *years*. The rest follows from that. And would a larger discussion at debconf'05 not have been more appropriate than handing done a couple of taken decision disguised as proposal ? It is not too late for this yet, but there needs to be a real discussion with real facts, and not just a list of resolution letting 8/11th of the project in the cold. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
