[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: clear policy discussions

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: clear policy discussions
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 03:56:57 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 05:27:57PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
> > And, above all, won't require the Release Manager to be an expert
> > programmer.
> Or communicator.  Or look at recent issue reports more thoroughly than
> counting "Critical" labels to get an impression of the state of affairs.
> Or be possessed of common sense.  In fact, she could be a cron job if
> somebody bothered putting the rules into a script.
> If we instead delegated that decision to a moron without a clue, he
> would likely try to figure out from others what he is supposed to do.
> Which would be a large step forward in contrast to what we do now.


I realize that you are angry, but please stop using words like
"monkey" or "moron" or "[not] possessed of common sense".  Those
are precisely the kind of terms that make this mailing list less
civil and drive away developers.

To quote pg's guidelines for discussions on,
When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling
names. E.g. "That is an idiotic thing to say; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3"
can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

I believe that we agree that the old policies were designed to
remove any element of choice or human judgement from the release
policy.  In fact, that was an explicit goal!  You believe this was
a very bad idea.  I agree that evidence has shown that it is
probably not optimal.  We are currently discussing how to change
it, so I see little benefit in arguing over precisely how bad the
current policy is.

- Graham

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]