motu-release will revert libgems-ruby to the old state.

[Daniel Holbach]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sarah Hobbs schrieb:
> Which, by my discussions with Daniel, and the general perception that
> seems to be going around, means that they *do* in fact have the
> authority, and that your argument is therefore null and void.

No. This is not at all what I said.

During the short conversation with Sarah I mentioned a couple of times
that there had been no discussion of the goals and aims of the MOTU
Release Team or procedures that I know of.

In addition to that I said that I'd absolutely appreciate more
initiatives from the MOTU Release team for setting release goals for
Universe and Multiverse and that I briefly brought up the topic at UDS.

My opinion is the following: If in an ideal world a team decides to take
on additional responsibilites and make sure that certain goals and rules
are observed they think about a procedure, discuss it and ask for
feedback, refine it and announce it. Luckily this is what happened in
almost all cases in the MOTU teams. (SRU procedure, Freeze exceptions,
reviewing, etc.)


> I've asked Daniel to publicly clarify the official position, which will
> hopefully clear up any possibly future confusion.

I fail to see how I can declare an official position.

In terms of team procedures, we shortly discussed documenting the
"wiki-fy a proposal, discuss it in the meeting or on the mailing list,
refine it, announce it" process and I briefly mentioned Scott's proposal
for decision making by finding the "rough consensus".

Have a nice day,
 Daniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIvluhRjrlnQWd1esRAtDCAJ430l73Vwf5ihFrvwdHsJVidACZmgCggYX+
apdim/SxSSfo9tCo3m2ycjw=
=JhTM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----