Re: Questions

On Fri, 2003-12-26 at 15:40, Ali Akcaagac wrote:
> Hello,

Hi Ali,
[I'm selectively quoting what I want to reply to. Of course there is
more in the parent e-mail.]

> Say the people who have manifest their position as Release Team it then
> becomes hard for new people to participate there. On the Release Teams
> page you see that the aim is to have a 6 months rotation of the people
> so others get the chance to do the job as well but from my
> investigations the same people were sitting there 1 year ago, 2 years
> ago etc. I don't want to value them as person but I think it is
> singlesided and the people outside can not influence it enough.

I know for a fact that Murray wanted to stop doing the release team for
a bit if a replacement could be found and saw quite a few people asked
on IRC after 2.4 was released; the problem is that they didn't want to
do it. Now of course, he's back as the language-bindings guy ...

I think the problem with rotating release team members is not that we
want to "hang in" for as long as possible, just that a lot of the most
qualified members of the community are too busy :)

[As a side note, if you have any specific objections (as opposed to not
rotating enough) to the way the release team run things we'd love to
hear them. We try to mirror the community's opinions as best we can:
and, of course, get releases out the door.]

> How can a abuse look like: Explaining this will definately upset a few
> people now but I do not see another chance to explain it other than
> naming it. Say there are some competition products such as
> buildingsystems for GNOME, now the Release Coordinator and current
> Chairman has a similar product of his own. Due his position he forces
> his product into the GNOME project and ignores other existing solutions
> driven by other people whose aims are to support GNOME as well.

This is garnome vs. cvsgnome.

iirc, and my memory may be playing games, I added garnome to the 2.4
webpage when people started asking "How do I build all these tarballs?"
on IRC. It is currently the most popular tarball build system. Of
course, it will be logged in CVS if that's what happened (probably with
a stupid commit message).

So please don't solely blame Jeff for garnome being mentioned there. I
am an evil conspirator too :)

[On the issue of which ones _should_ be named, I am unsure (aka. please
don't flame me). I just wanted to solve an immediate problem, so I added
the link.]

Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]