Re: RFC: Changing the NM system

2000-12-18 Thread Taketoshi Sano
I left the cc to debian-project list intentionally. Maybe I should set Reply-To to that. In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Sun, 17 Dec 2000 22:57:46 +0100, Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 09:27:19AM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 09:33:35AM

Re: RFC: Changing the NM system

2000-12-18 Thread Petr Cech
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 12:04:08AM +0100 , Cord Beermann wrote: > When i look into the BTS, i see a lot of bugs, that are somehow fixed, > but not closed, or bugs where no one has touched them for years. > (not even 'wontfix' or 'moreinfo' -actions.) do you remember, how long are those tags suppor

Re: RFC: Changing the NM system

2000-12-18 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Sun, Dec 17, 2000 at 01:13:18AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, 17 Dec 2000, Cord Beermann wrote: > > It's wrong to let NM run through a long procedure, and on the other > > side old maintainers disappear (or stop working on their Package) and > > nobody cares. > > That's another point I'm

Re: RFC: Changing the NM system

2000-12-18 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Sat, Dec 16, 2000 at 07:29:30PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > We have currently over 600 developers and at about 6000 packages > that have over 600 RC bugs. And the sun goes up with the cockcrow, but that doesn't mean that the cockcrow is the reason for it. > If we don't have severe look at the