Hi, On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 03:43:03AM +0200, Roman Zippel wrote: > > > The question is what to do _instead_. > > The point is that m68k gets kicked out _before_ any alternative has been > > implemented. > > m68k has not been kicked out -- it's still in etch at the moment. It's > not going to stay there though, and it's already been a month since > that's been decided with no alternative implemented yet. It'd be nice > if there was an alternative before it gets kicked out, but there's not > a lot of time left. > > And if that's just going to get spent on complaining... Well, I did my share that m68k could be released just fine, I think I earned the right to "complain". It's now in the hands of those who made this decision. It's rather disappointing to see how anonymously to those decisions constantly are refered to. This kind of behaviour I expect from some shareholder corporation, where profit is everything and where employees get told "it" has been decided, that they are not met their quota and get kicked out. I was kind of hoping that Debian would be different, that mutual support had still some value. Since m68k has lost its release status, I have not seen many offers to help in regaining that status. Once bugs lose the RC critical status they lose a lot of attention. What makes this worse that now that m68k could very well be in a releasable state, there is still no helping hand and instead there is only insisting on release criteria, which were unrealistic in the first place. bye, Roman -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
