Le mercredi 28 février 2007 à 12:34 -0700, Elijah Newren a écrit : > Hi Benoit, > > I'm sorry that this process upset you. It looks like Kjartan > responded to most of your questions, but there was one he didn't > respond to that I thought might help everyone a bit. > > > > The only > > > thing we wanted was to have a working tarball for your module in the > > > beta. > > > > Is Mariano part of the release-team ? No. > > Has the release-team dared to email me to explain why they authorize > > this ? No. > > I wasn't involved with building this specific release, and wasn't > around when these changes were made. But I think I understand what > happened from the thread so far. Let me explain my take on the > situation: > > We probably should have emailed you earlier, yes, although I think > Kjartan's emails (even if they didn't come until after you brought the > issue up) do actually count as an explanation of why the release-team > authorized this. Kjartan was handling this release, and as he > explained in his second email of this thread, the gnome-system-monitor > tarball didn't build with recent gnome-doc-utils. He said he tried to > contact you, but couldn't get a hold of you immediately. They were > *really* close to the due date for the release, and the fix was > simple, so Kjartan made the choice to fix it. OK. > I'm not sure how Kjartan's choice is wrong or bad; he was acting for > the release team since he was heading up the release and the choice > seems logical to me. However, it did upset you and I'd really like to > avoid repeating that. Do you have any suggestions for what we could > do or avoid in the future to get releases out on time while also > avoiding any problems like this? Would just having Kjartan (or the > person from the release-team handling the given release) send you an > email when they take such an action, as you suggested earlier, be > enough? What happened exactly : On Wednesday night, i released .93 and logoff at about midnight CET. When i got up on Thursday, i found in my inbox a single mail from a stranger (to me) telling that he had released .94. As there was no explanation in the mail, I had a look at the svn diff and the comment I found was "added a description, to make g-d-u happy" which looks like a low priority fix. I went mad. You know what happened then. I had to ask about what was going on. I only understood what happened yesterday at 20H00 with the second email from Kjartan : "The tarball didn't build with the current version of gnome-doc-utils, which is why we wanted a working tarball in the beta." It's OK for the release-team to do whatever they need, you don't need my approval. But please keep me informed. Next time, i would like to get : - an email - from the release-team - as soon as possible - about the problem - on who is going to fix it - how - when. "Hi, system-monitor .93 doesn't build with gnome-doc-utils x.x.x because of a missing item in the xml file. We needed a working tarball for the beta. As you were not reachable, Mariano has fixed system-monitor svn (revision xxx) and has released .94." would have been perfect. About this breaking change in gnome-doc-utils, i was unaware of it. jhbuild doesn't pull gnome-doc-utils when building gnome-system-monitor. Maybe a bot/tinderbox building it in a fully updated env would have helped. -- Benoît Dejean GNOME http://www.gnomefr.org/ LibGTop http://directory.fsf.org/libgtop.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=