Micah Anderson writes:
> Clint Adams writes:
>> [Adding and M-F-T-ing -project]
[...]
>> Were you there? Were Debian funds spend on this endeavor? What
>> happened there? Most importantly, why is it all so secretive?
>
> Did I miss a response to these questions? I'm interested to know the
> an
Clint Adams writes:
> [Adding and M-F-T-ing -project]
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 10:04:58AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> I want to point out that Luk's mail was not in any way discussed in the
>> release team. I think it is horrible.
>>
>> I welcome everyone to critize the release te
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 06:14:45PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 04:09:34PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > That meeting took place in May of last year. What's the point of discussing
> > it almost 9 months later? What exactly triggered your blog post?
>
> We are in an election
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 02:24:51PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> > I'm confused as to why you are expecting to be involved in or be
> > informed about a meeting of a team you are not a part of?
>
> If a team is meeting, the meeting and agenda should be
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> I'm confused as to why you are expecting to be involved in or be
> informed about a meeting of a team you are not a part of?
If a team is meeting, the meeting and agenda should be announced, and
the decisions and discussions which occur in the meeting
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 08:18:54PM +, Matthew Johnson wrote:
> I'm confused as to why you are expecting to be involved in or be informed
> about
> a meeting of a team you are not a part of?
I'm confused as to why multiple DDs don't seem to understand
what "transparency" means.
--
To UNSUBS
On Mon Mar 15 05:16, Clint Adams wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 09:23:23PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/03/msg00011.html
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2009/05/msg00080.html
> >
> > So it wasn't that secret after all. (Note that
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 03:09:43PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> To that end, it would be nice to have a specific question posed on
> -vote: that venue is IMHO more appropriate to answer your question than
> -project. (Or just prod the candidates to follow-up there if the above
> is already th
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 06:14:45PM +, Clint Adams wrote:
> We are in an election period and I would like for the project
> to elect a DPL who not only does not support a certain level
> of non-transparency, but is actively intolerant of it.
>
> I do not know whether or not we have any potential
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 09:23:23PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/03/msg00011.html
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2009/05/msg00080.html
>
> So it wasn't that secret after all. (Note that all this happened last
> year, including Luk's tw
On Sunday 14 March 2010, Gerfried Fuchs wrote:
> * Frans Pop [2010-03-14 16:09:34 CET]:
> > [1] I think release management for (old)stable is being handled quite
> > well ATM.
>
> While this might be true and valid for stable, I am not too convinced
> that the last point release of oldstable from
* Frans Pop [2010-03-14 16:09:34 CET]:
> [1] I think release management for (old)stable is being handled quite well
> ATM.
While this might be true and valid for stable, I am not too convinced
that the last point release of oldstable from April 8th of last year is
too much for being called hand
Luk Claes writes:
> The whole thing about secrecy is exagerated AFAICS as there just is not
> much to tell. The reason these things mostly remain private is that
> there is not much to tell and making things public without the consent
> of everyone involved is not done.
A general rule of thumb t
* Clint Adams:
> Okay, so when there is a mysterious release team meeting in Cambridge,
> and there is no discussion or planning of it on debian-release, or
> #debian-release, or anywhere else public that I can see,
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/03/msg00011.html
http://lists.
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 04:09:34PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> Although to some level I agree with you [1], I wonder if you could explain
> one thing.
>
> That meeting took place in May of last year. What's the point of discussing
> it almost 9 months later? What exactly triggered your blog post?
Clint Adams writes:
> Okay, so when there is a mysterious release team meeting in Cambridge,
> and there is no discussion or planning of it on debian-release, or
> #debian-release, or anywhere else public that I can see
[...]
> Were you there?
No.
> Were Debian funds spend on this endeavor? Wha
On Sunday 14 March 2010, Clint Adams wrote:
> Okay, so when there is a mysterious release team meeting in Cambridge,
> and there is no discussion or planning of it on debian-release [...]
Clint,
Although to some level I agree with you [1], I wonder if you could explain
one thing.
That meeting t
Clint Adams wrote:
> [Adding and M-F-T-ing -project]
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 10:04:58AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
>> I want to point out that Luk's mail was not in any way discussed in the
>> release team. I think it is horrible.
>>
>> I welcome everyone to critize the release team.
[Adding and M-F-T-ing -project]
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 10:04:58AM +0100, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote:
> I want to point out that Luk's mail was not in any way discussed in the
> release team. I think it is horrible.
>
> I welcome everyone to critize the release team. I would prefer help, of
> c
19 matches
Mail list logo