Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Sven Luther] >> No, he is not, as far as i am concerned, unless he presents his >> apologies first. > > For what? Commenting on your wast amount of email posted the last few > days, and his suggestion that the amount of email could make the > ftpmasters delete mails by mistake? I can not really believe that is > your problem, so please enlighten me. > >> No, that is not acceptable, and probably not the right reason for >> this. Until evidence proves otherwise, it is just because they don't >> care to read those emails, and that that email address is simply >> forwarded to /dev/null. > > I didn't say it was acceptable. I tried to put it in perspective. > I'm well aware of at least some of the communication issues with the > ftpmasters, but truly believe these problems are because the > ftpmasters are overworked, not because they are evil. And I believe > this even though one of the ftpmasters told me on IRC to stop wasting > his time when I wanted to discuss making the list of packages in NEW > public. I put it on the account of misjudgement during stress, not > evil will. > > I suspect you would be better off if you accepted that misjudgement > and mistakes happen also for the ftpmasters. After all, your emails > haven't been the perfect examples of rational and clear speek either > (though not as hostile as others on the list. :). I do not hold that > against you, and wish you didn't hold such miscommunications and and > misjudgements against the other volunteers in Debian. > >> That would be a solution. But then are the ftp-masters ready to get >> the problems they receive publicly visible ? > > I didn't propose to make it all public. request-tracker is capable of > fine grained access control. > >> No, a professional attitude would have them reply to the people they >> are working with. > > Again, I agree that the ftpmaster role should reply to all requests. > But if the volunteers filling this role are very busy, it does not > help to shout at them and send even more email. A different solution > must be found, and I hope and believe we are on our way to a solution > to the problems the project is facing. > >> but this have become the norm these past couple month, and Steve's >> 'proposal' was the last straw. > > I guess I do not read the proposal the way you read it. I read it as > a document describing the problems the release team and the ftpmaster > experiences with the release process, and their ideas on how to > improve the situation. But first and formost, I read the proposal as > a good step forward for the release of sarge. After all, the ideas > for reorganizing the process for etch wasn't the most important part > of the "vancouver" announcement. The most important part was that the > release managers and the ftpmasters are coordinated in their work to > release Sarge. > > Since the meeting 189 packages have been processed from the NEW queue. > I believe this is the result of the meeting, where the ftpmasters was > able to meet with prospective ftpmaster assistant. I also believe the > increased effort to release sarge is a result of this meeting. > > Well, this email is already getting fairly long. Enough hot air from > me this time, I believe. > > I am truly sorry for loosing you. You have done a good job helping > Debian progress the state of free software, and it is sad that you > decide to throw in the towel because of hard language from a fellow > Debian volunteer. :(
-- Frank Küster Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich Debian Developer
