hurry before FFe

Soren Hansen soren at ubuntu.com
Wed Apr 2 14:59:41 BST 2008


On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:18:06PM +0200, Stefan Potyra wrote:
>> What should we do about it, though?
> I guess one measure is a gradual freeze policy, which starts out with
> a very soft layer of thin ice at the beginning, and gets to an
> unbreakable barrier at the end of the freeze. 

I don't think the policy itself needs to change. Especially in ways that
are impossible to evaluate objectively.

> (I tried to apply this measure for this cycle, with almost waiving
> through new packages at the beginning). Of course such a policy must
> also be made well known (which didn't happen this cycle yet, sorry for
> this).

I think this is the core of the issue. We can keep the policy we have
now, and somehow make it more transparent that getting an FFe approved
shortly after FF is usually not very difficult.

The MOTU team is still relatively young and lots and lots of our
policies have changed imcompatibly multiple times. For anyone who's not
very active, it can be hard to keep up. Heck, *I* have a hard time
keeping up from time to time. And that's just the policy as it's
written. Keeping up with the current interpretation of policy is even
worse. We need to fix this.

-- 
Soren Hansen               | 
Virtualisation specialist  | Ubuntu Server Team
Canonical Ltd.             | http://www.ubuntu.com/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/motu-council/attachments/20080402/9a57240e/attachment.pgp 


More information about the Motu-council mailing list