1 |
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:46:50 -0500 Chris Gianelloni |
2 |
<wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
| On Wed, 2004-11-17 at 16:29 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
4 |
| > I suggest you take a look through the managers' meeting logs |
5 |
| > regarding the decided upon set of rules for an arch releasing into |
6 |
| > official rather than experimental. Then, once you've read them and |
7 |
| > understand the requirements, come back and explain why x86 ended up |
8 |
| > being exempt, despite the whole "x86 will not be exempt" thing. |
9 |
| |
10 |
| How about you enlighten me, or better yet, point me to where I can |
11 |
| find these precious logs. I don't have copies of them, nor would I |
12 |
| know which manager's meeting yo are referring to precisely. |
13 |
|
14 |
The meeting in question was on 25 Oct 2004. Logs may or may not have |
15 |
been posted to -core at some point. |
16 |
|
17 |
| I've got an even better idea. |
18 |
| |
19 |
| How about explaining why if there some some major decision made that |
20 |
| would affect the release, that there was no notification of it other |
21 |
| than having to weed through the logs from the manager's meeting? |
22 |
| |
23 |
| Perhaps that level of professional courtesy is a bit much to ask. |
24 |
| After all, I can't think of a single reason why the release team |
25 |
| should be informed of changes made to the release process. If this |
26 |
| information was disseminated to the release team, then it never made |
27 |
| it to me, and seeing as how I am the operational manager and acting |
28 |
| strategic manager in zhen's absence, I would think I would be the |
29 |
| *first* person that should have been contacted in such a situation. |
30 |
|
31 |
*shrug* Don't ask me, that's a manager thing. If you're acting in zhen's |
32 |
place as manager, I'd say that this would be one of *your* jobs. |
33 |
|
34 |
-- |
35 |
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, Sparc, Mips) |
36 |
Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org |
37 |
Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm |