From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GJxmS-0007qP-UQ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2006 19:37:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id k83JZbVa008341; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 19:35:37 GMT Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org (66-191-187-123.dhcp.gnvl.sc.charter.com [66.191.187.123]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k83JVxgk001071 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 19:31:59 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2722480FC for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 15:27:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.twi-31o2.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (gravity.twi-31o2.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 30110-19 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 15:27:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from vertigo.twi-31o2.org (vertigo.twi-31o2.org [192.168.0.10]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.twi-31o2.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0069248066 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2006 15:27:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Democracy: No silver bullet From: Chris Gianelloni To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <44ECF00D.7050107@gentoo.org> <7573e9640609022011m765331ccx52eb96c841a5546f@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-+5JYv+6PEaK/QiE5aOdl" Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2006 15:29:19 -0400 Message-Id: <1157311759.13936.17.camel@vertigo.twi-31o2.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.2 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at twi-31o2.org X-Archives-Salt: 669c2fef-1a12-4aa0-abd2-8b1557754ebc X-Archives-Hash: e49a85d7b4ddc5c52146336fa9daea10 --=-+5JYv+6PEaK/QiE5aOdl Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 07:15 +0000, Wiktor Wandachowicz wrote: > But to be honest, stabilization of packages was not my point. ((BTW, stab= le > X.org, KDE or GNOME would IMO delay the release for a week, so users woul= dn't > need to upgrade in such a short time frame - but that's what I think)) People seem to think that the Release Engineering team doesn't talk with the GNOME/X/KDE/kernel teams. We *know* when they're planning on going stable and we work with them. How do we know this? Was *ask* them. Here's a good example. We took our snapshot for 2006.1 *before* GNOME 2.14 went stable on *any* arches. However, we worked with both the arch teams *and* the GNOME team to mark it stable in our snapshot on architectures who wanted to participate. Why did we do this? to avoid this exact situation. I really wish people would take the time to either ask the Release Engineering team, or learn how we work before they go off making accusations against us. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux --=-+5JYv+6PEaK/QiE5aOdl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBE+y0PkT4lNIS36YERAgXrAJ97VpZcPUS0302V5I5+0zgoyTSMtgCfUWxC m1PyHXcoBneZmqElSCZoOQI= =X1O3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-+5JYv+6PEaK/QiE5aOdl-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list