release policy

2004-07-29 Thread Raul Miller
release policy. On the flip side, the constitution says The Technical Committee does not engage in design of new proposals and policies, and I'm wondering if Anthony is expecting us to do so instead of deciding on specific issues. I think we'd have no problem ratifying a problem, or deciding

Re: release policy

2004-07-16 Thread Anthony Towns
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 07:59:01PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: Is it acceptable to everyone if the technical committee tacitly approves the current release policy? No. [Which is to say -- we've seen it, we've not raised any significant reasons to change any of it, so we're opting

Re: release policy

2004-07-15 Thread Raul Miller
Is it acceptable to everyone if the technical committee tacitly approves the current release policy? [Which is to say -- we've seen it, we've not raised any significant reasons to change any of it, so we're opting for the default which is that it's ok.] ? Thanks, -- Raul

Re: release policy

2004-07-10 Thread Ian Jackson
Raul Miller writes (release policy): Attached, below, is AJ's release critical policy, in the context of sarge. I'm thinking we should ratify it, as is. As soon as possible. Gads, do we really need to ratify the entire text of this document ? I'm thinking we should ratify a changed

Re: release policy

2004-07-10 Thread Raul Miller
that the Developers intent is that the release policy for sarge should not be affected by the Social Contract changes in GR 2004-003, and that the policy should remain de facto unchanged. We have been delegated the question of the release policy for sarge, in the light of the General

Re: release policy

2004-07-07 Thread Manoj Srivastava
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 11:17:23 -0400, Raul Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Attached, below, is AJ's release critical policy, in the context of sarge. I'm thinking we should ratify it, as is. As soon as possible. I think we should edit the bit about dfsg freeness may become a