Philip Brown <[email protected]> writes: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 3:48 AM, Peter FELECAN <[email protected]> wrote: >>... >> . Anyhow, in my opinion, you assumed this role for a >> too long time and that is the reason for which you cannot consider a >> situation where you don't have that role. Not having the role of release >> manager seems for you the end of your participation to the >> community. Aut caesar aut nihil. This is a strange attachment. > > > If you were proposing simply removing ME as release manager, and > having the position be elected, your opinion might have some > justification for it. > But since instead you are trying to eliminate the position entirely, > your ad hominen attack is completely misdirected.
I tried to convey in my messages that this is not an ad hominem attack. That being said, I'm against a kind of paternalistic and absolutist posture that you take and I'm afraid any release manager having discretionary power would take. Consequently, I'm not against you as Philip Brown per se, and that being said, lets move on the main issue which is the release process as proposed in the referred document which mandates the usage of automatic verification and validation tools based on well defined and known policies issued by the maintainers community consensus. -- Peter _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
