Bill Allombert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 04:43:29PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: >> > >> > This rely on the premices that at least some options will allow to release >> > sarge sooner. Unfortunately discussions on debian-vote involving the >> > release manager and the ctte had made clear to me that none of the >> > ballot options will have positive effect on the release of sarge, making >> > the exercise rather pointless, the reason being, all the options focus >> > on the previous SC change and side-step the real issue which is the >> > change of the release policy. I see no evidence that any changes of the >> > SC will imply change in the release policy allowing to release sarge >> > sooner. >> >> Can you please refer me to the discussions in question? As far as I can >> tell, both Steve and I (release assistants) have an entirely different >> impression, and between us we proposed some of the options on the >> ballot. > > For example: > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00220.html> > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2004/05/msg00396.html>
Which are statements by Anthony, who has delegated his responsibility on this topic. > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2004/06/msg00002.html> ,---- | Therefore: | | * The Developers must decide whether to waive or amend the Social | Contract. If no waiver is forthcoming, then Sarge will not be | released until all of the problematic material has been sorted | out. `---- This contradicts what you said, instead of supporting it. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster, Biozentrum der Univ. Basel Abt. Biophysikalische Chemie
