Gentoo Archives: gentoo-devrel

From: Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o>
To: gentoo-devrel@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 03:18:29
Message-Id: 20050907031820.GA499@cerberus.oppresses.us
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc by Paul Varner
1 On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 09:51:12PM -0500, Paul Varner wrote:
2 > On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 16:41 -0500, Deedra Waters wrote:
3 > > The devrel members who first approached me on this think that this is
4 > > too much red tape for something that 1, is literally probably going to
5 > > almost never be used 2, it's going to take too long to do anything with,
6 > > and take too long to get results that are going to make people happy,
7 > > and 3 most of them agreed to this policy because at the time it looked
8 > > like the best option. In looking back at it, it's not the best option,
9 > > so they want something less complicated.
10 > >
11 >
12 > 1. If it is almost never used, where is the extra red-tape?
13
14 The point is not taking forever and a day to respond when things do
15 happen.
16
17 > 2. Why is it going to take too long to get results?
18
19 Because there will be endless meetings and discussions.
20
21 > 3. What has changed to make it not look like the best option?
22 >
23
24 People took a step back from trying to just do whatever it takes to
25 please the handful of "devrel == stalin" folks
26
27 --
28 Jon Portnoy
29 avenj/irc.freenode.net
30 --
31 gentoo-devrel@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-devrel] devrel meeting etc Paul Varner <fuzzyray@g.o>