On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:25:11AM -0500, Caleb Tennis wrote: > > Why taking it against arch teams? How is that different from > > "certain maintainer not taking care of a bug that holds > > stabilization of certain package by some time measured in months" ? > > I'll tell you my answer: 'no difference at all'. > > You are right, there's not much difference. However, I brought up the > topic because I felt like this particular situation was a bit of a > problem that needed to be addressed. Yours is also one that > can/should potentially be addressed, and I advise you to recommend the > council discuss it as well.
Well, while discussing what you brought up, they should _also_ consider what I said as part of the same (so-called) problem. > My goal wasn't to point fingers or to call anyone lazy. My goal was > to address that if development in this certain area has stagnated, how > can those of us who it affects continue to move forward? This is > simply an area that is "gray" and needs to be discussed. There are > many other gray areas that need to be discussed too. > > I understand we all have real lives and are volunteers. But if there > are areas that we are responsible for and we aren't able to meet the > needs/demands of the other developers in those areas, it's only fair > to let them continue moving forward. > > I never even mentioned any specific arch in my original request, nor > did I call any developer out. So please, nobody needs to take this > personally. I didn't take it personally myself, honestly, I couldn't care less. Wonder why there is almost no non-mainstream arch team people contributing to this thread? - ferdy -- Fernando J. Pereda Garcimartín 20BB BDC3 761A 4781 E6ED ED0B 0A48 5B0C 60BD 28D4
pgpOiXoZzRjqH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
