Re: Decisions you didn't intend to make [Was: Minutes of the meeting (2006-07-31)]



On 8/1/06, Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org> wrote:
It seemed pretty clear to me during the first meeting that there was
agreement on this point

It seemed pretty clear to me that there was agreement that the idea of
franchising the release process was worth pursuing (I believe I was
one of those who voiced support).  If there was any agreement at all
on this other issue, it escaped me.  *shrug*

> To be honest, from my vantage point all I could see you doing was
> repeatedly claim that people were conflating the issues without explaining
> why they aren't intrinsically connected.

That was explained in my (lengthy, explanatory) email to d-d-l.

I read it, and the follow up emails, but missed any explanation of why
these things weren't intrinsically connected.  Like I said, maybe I
was just being dense and it really was there.  But I somehow didn't
catch it.

> > making a decision that, all things considered, is inappropriate for the
> > release team - alone, at this time, with the non-specific discussion
> > we've had so far about this issue - to make.
>
> Perhaps I'm missing something, but I definitely don't follow. Care to
> explain why it's inappropriate for the release team to make?

Note what I said: It's inappropriate for the release team - *alone, at this
time, with the non-specific discussion we've had so far on this issue* - to
make this decision.

Yes, I noted the assertion you made.  I asked if you could explain
your assertion and give a reason why it was true, but you merely
repeated it.  Proof by assertion tends to leave me confused rather
than clearing things up.  ;-)

I was not speaking for the board, but I felt it was pretty clear (and also
thought it was agreed) that it was an inappropriate time and circumstance
for the release team to make the policy decision regarding Gtk# and the
Desktop suite.

Well, that wasn't at all clear to me or anyone else at the meeting, as
far as I can tell.  So, I guess we had a communication disconnect
somewhere.  Sorry about that.  :(

> I'd be more than willing to state that some individuals want to take the
> decision to the foundation board, and reminding everyone that the
> foundation board has oversight of the release-team and ought to exercise
> that oversight when they feel it's in the community's best interests.
> Would that help you feel better?

Possibly - like I said above, I do not have an immediate idea about how to
fix this, and I am not willing to jump to any conclusions or make any
assumptions about it right now. That is another way to approach it, but it
is laden with additional problems ("FOUNDATION BOARD OVERRULES RELEASE TEAM
ON MONO DECISION" is a pretty clear message you could take from it). I just

I think that'd be a poor way to see it.  I honestly think the board
should have more oversight over the release team and various other
groups in the community.  Especially since the board is elected and
the r-t is not; having oversight from the board seems critical to me
long-term for things to remain successful.  Of course, I'm sure I'm
just preaching to the choir here.

> ...but I have to admit you are correct about who I was thinking of when
> targetting the message.

That's exactly why I said it that way. :-)

:-)

Cheers,
Elijah



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