> I do not understand why the Nybbles team mixed their good news about > sarge with their foreseeably controversial plans or proposal for etch.
This may have been a strategical error, yes. For me, the Vancouver meeting goal was obviously the sarge release and IMHO, they achieved their goal very well. My interpretation is that doing so, interesting ideas cam to float around and were formalized enough for the "post-sarge" plans to be announced. We should be realistic : this meeting was a good opportunity of getting together what we can call "key people" (no offense intended at all...far from this) and thus a good opportunity for these key people to make proposals. OK, experience shows that they should probably have separated the things about sarge release and the things about post-sarge ideas/plans/whatever, as everyone knows that *any* proposal made in Debian triggers a counterproductive flamew^W endless discussion. I suppose there were reasons for this and I grant the Vancouver meeting people enough respect for having good reasons...even if this ends up in being a strategical error. My personal concern now is avoiding to "throw out the baby with the bath's water" as we say in French. OK, the architecture handling is controversial. Fine...this will probably delay etch more than we would like. But could we please focus on releasing sarge first? By focus, I also mean avoidn wasting valuable DD time to endless discussions (no real human can read this thread already), flamewars and personal attacks (I'm quite saddened by Julien's hard attacks and proposal to do the Revolution). This thread obviously shows that some more real life discussions are needed about post-sarge plans and I don't doubt that involved people will welcome more contributions and start thinking again. This is very likely to be my last contribution to this thread.... except in sub-threads dealing with sarge release. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]